Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 2393 (ALL)

Naresh Chandra v. State of U. P.

2015-08-13

KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE

body2015
JUDGMENT Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J. This application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 211 of 2014, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Nawabganj, District Bareilly. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. 2. Perused the record. 3. Submission of counsel for the applicant is that actually the deceased had developed an illicit liaison with the applicant's wife and it so happened that the same unsavory relationship got exposed and came to the knowledge of the applicant. It is also said that the amorous conversations that took place between the deceased and the wife of the applicant were also got recorded by the applicant. Further submission is that there is evidence to the effect that the applicant had also tried to demoralize the deceased and had given him threat that he shall convene a panchayat for this immoral act in which the deceased had indulged himself. It was next submitted that now the prosecution allegation is that under this background, the deceased had committed suicide. The contention is that it is quite possible that the deceased might have committed suicide because of this background of the matter and for the reason that he felt humiliated and cornered, and feared the overhanging imminent humiliation which was inevitably going to come on his head if a panchayat was to be convened in that regard. But despite all this, it cannot be said that it was the applicant who had abetted the deceased to commit suicide. Counsel has tried to differentiate between the act of abatement and any other cause of suicide. Submission is that actually the act of suicide can be committed by an over-sensitive person for various emotional pressure and fear of social embarrassment. How much a hyper sensitive person would react and how shall he conduct himself under given circumstances can not be predicted. There is no tangible evidence on the basis of which the applicant may be saddled with the guilt of having committed the act of abetment which drove the deceased to commit suicide. Lastly, it was also emphasized by the counsel that the applicant has already languished in jail for more than one year and is behind the bars since 30.10.2014. There is no tangible evidence on the basis of which the applicant may be saddled with the guilt of having committed the act of abetment which drove the deceased to commit suicide. Lastly, it was also emphasized by the counsel that the applicant has already languished in jail for more than one year and is behind the bars since 30.10.2014. In fact, counsel has tried to submit that though it is unfortunate and a different matter that the deceased has committed suicide but initially he himself was on the wrong side and had himself committed the perfidious act of betrayal against the friendship. It was his own sense of shame and the mortifying fear of exposure before the entire society that actually pushed him to take the extreme step and not any kind of abetment on the part of the applicant who had only said things to the deceased whichever normal human being would say in such circumstances as are involved in this case. It was also submitted that in fact, the prosecution side has unfairly tried to create some evidence against the applicant and had initially tried to show that it is a case of murder but the investigation of the case itself reveals that there was no truth about the allegation of murder and the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. was dropped by the Investigating Agency. 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 he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. 5. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. 5. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant-Naresh Chandra involved in Case Crime No. 211 of 2014, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Nawabganj, District Bareilly, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions : - (1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice. 7. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail. 8. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.