Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 192 of 2019, under Sections498-A, 304-B, 201 I.P.C. & 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Nagram, District-Lucknow.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that accusedapplicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He submitted that the applicant is in jail since 11.08.2019 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak.
4. Further submitted that the marriage of the applicant and the deceased was solemnized on 16.04.2016 and the occurrence is of 09.08.2019 and in relation to this period, the prosecution has not indicated in its story that for settling dispute related to the dowry a social meeting was organized or an application was moved before the competent authority. Moreover, the allegations levelled in the FIR regarding cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry are bald and vague. Thus, the same are liable to be disbelieved.
5. It is further submitted that with oblique motive all the family members of the applicant including the applicant were implicated in present case. However, the charge sheet was filed, after due investigation, against the husband (present applicant) and mother-in-law and father of the deceased, thus, the initial story of the prosecution appears to be doubtful.
6. Further submission is that prior to the alleged incident some dispute arose between the applicant and the deceased and deceased who was very sensitive, called upon the informant and to teach lesson to the present applicant the informant, father of deceased, lodged the FIR dated 06.08.2019 under Sections 323 and 506 IPC. As per this FIR the applicant used to torture the deceased and the deceased would commit suicide on account of the same.
7. It is further submitted that no doubt some altercation took lace on 06.08.2019 but the same was not of such nature that one could commit suicide. It was a dispute which can occur between the husband and wife. However, the deceased was very sensitive in nature and she carried the said incident in her mind and ultimately the deceased committed suicide in the night of 07.08.2019. It is stated that the applicant was searching the deceased but she was not found and in the meantime, the FIR was lodged on 10.08.2019. Thereafter, the body of the deceased was found from a canal and inquest and post-mortem was carried out. As per post-mortem report the cause of death is Asphyxia due to Drowning. Two contusion were also found by the Autopsy surgeon which can be sustained while committing suicide. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
8. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
9. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail. He submitted that the informant earlier also lodged the FIR against the applicant on 06.08.2019 and from the contents of this FIR it appears that the applicant was used to torture the deceased. The death is within statutory period i.e. within seven years from the date of marriage, as such, the presumption is against the applicant. Thus, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. Prayer is to reject the bail application. However, he could not dispute the fact that regarding allegation of demand of dowry prior to lodging of FIR in issue the prosecution has not indicated that any social meeting was organized or any application was moved before the authority concerned. Moreover, it is crystal clear that prior to the present incident an FIR was lodged on 06.08.2019 in which there is no allegation related to the demand of dowry.
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind the period of incarceration, medical opinion and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
11. Let applicant- Umesh Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed.
(4) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(5) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
12. Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
