Allahabad High Court
Dharmendra Singh vs State Of U.P. on 15 January, 2025
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6918 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54964 of 2023 Applicant :- Dharmendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kameshwar Singh,Raj Narayan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Kameshwar Singh and Sri Raj Narayan Singh, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 122 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Pahari, District – Chitrakoot, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the victim about six years before her death. The applicant and other persons are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry, thereby led to her death on 09.07.2023.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by more than five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.
6. Learned counsel has also submitted that the victim, who had been married for six years, was experiencing depression due to her inability to conceive. Despite undergoing treatment with the applicant, the efforts were unsuccessful. Tragically, the victim succumbed to her depression and took her own life. The cause of death of deceased was found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging.
7. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant was granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 21.12.2023 and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. For ready reference, the said interim order dated 21.12.2023 is reproduced hereunder:-
“1. Sri Anirudh Singh, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of informant and the same is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.
3. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant pray for and are granted three weeks’ time to file counter affidavit.
4. There are allegations against the applicant of causing dowry death of his wife by way of hanging.
5. Counsel for the applicant submits that marriage of the applicant with victim took place six years ago and they have not given birth to any child. Treatment of the applicant and victim was going on for this purpose, during which deceased became frustrated and committed suicide by way of hanging. Allegation against the applicant with regard to additional demand of dowry is incorrect. The applicant is in jail since 02.08.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit.
6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.
7. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
8. Let the applicant- Dharmendra Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 122 of 2023, under Sections- 498A, 304B of IPC and Sections- 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Pahari, District- Chitrakoot, be released on interim bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 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.
9. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
11. List this case on 31.01.2024 before appropriate Bench.
12. In failure to comply this order, the interim bail for the period of three months granted to the applicant shall stand cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith.”
8. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.08.2023 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
9. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.
10. In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself.
11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
12. Let the applicant- Dharmendra Singh, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) 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 him in accordance with law.
13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
14. 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:- 15.1.2025
Siddhant
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
