Single judge allowed bail to the applicant in a trial case involving murder and dowry. Bail was granted with stringent conditions to ensure presence in court, prevention of tampering with evidence, and expedited trial conclusion within one year.
Application for bail allowed with stringent conditions; trial to be concluded within one year.
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. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8510 of 2020
Applicant :- Manoj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Sharma,Anuj Bajpai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Manoj, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.56 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Jalalabad, District- Shahjahanpur, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation against the applicant in the FIR that after 25 years of marriage of the applicant with the deceased, he committed the murder of his wife on account of suspicion regarding her character. Her dead body has been recovered besides the river.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case by the brother of the deceased. The demand of dowry after 25 years of marriage is not credible. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 02.02.2019. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 him in accordance with law.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 8.9.2022 Ruchi Agrahari
Digitally signed by RUCHI AGRAHARI Date: 2022.09.08 17:17:06 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant deserves bail in a case involving murder and dowry allegations.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & AnotherExplained¶10
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Manoj
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Siddharth
Parties & counsel
