This High Court granted bail to an applicant accused under Section 306 IPC, citing false implication and personal circumstances. Strict conditions were imposed to ensure trial cooperation and prevent adjournment mischief.
Release on personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to conditions against adjournment and mandatory court appearance.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51731 of 2022
Applicant :- Smt Roshani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Aadil Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard Mohd Aadil Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.130 of 2022, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Rakabganj, District Agra with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is a lady having two minor children aged about 5 years and 2 1/2 years respectively. As per postportem report, the cause of death is due to asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. Further contention is that the deceased was suffering from financial crises due to which he has committed suicide. No offence under Section 306 IPC is made out against the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that she is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make herself available before the court whenever required. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.09.2022 having no previous criminal history.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the
law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant- Smt Roshani involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 23.11.2022
Ajeet
Digitally signed by AJEET KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.11.23 13:15:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant be released on bail under Section 306 IPC given the allegations of false implication.
Whether specific conditions regarding adjournment, presence in court, and trial conclusion can be imposed to grant bail.
Whether the observations on bail affect the independent opinion of the trial judge.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of U.P.Referred¶10
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 · Who else cites this
Smt Roshani
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
