Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 232 (ALL)

Ramwati @ Sirakan v. State of U. P.

2016-01-18

MANOJ MISRA

body2016
JUDGMENT Manoj Misra, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Ashish Goyal for the informant; the learned A.G.A. for the State; and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No.475 of 2015, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Afjalgarh, District Bijnor with the prayer to enlarge her on bail. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the first information report was lodged by suspecting that the informant's son was murdered in which the applicant along with two other persons were involved. The postmortem report of the deceased reveals that except for ligature mark around his neck, no other injury was present and according to the opinion of the doctor the death was due to asphyxia as a result of anti mortem hanging. Subsequently, story has been developed that the accused person used to accuse/harass the victim for theft of a mobile phone on account of which the victim committed suicide. It has been submitted that there is hardly any evidence to suggest that the applicant abetted the commission of suicide by the victim. It has been submitted that the applicant is an innocent lady with no previous criminal history; she has been falsely implicated; and she is in jail since 06.11.2015 and, in case she is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not point out anything material to the contrary. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 6. Let applicant Smt. Ramwati @ Sirakan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice: - (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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 through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) 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. is issued and the 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 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 her in accordance with law.