Advocates:
['AMIT RAI', '', 'SANJAY SINGH', 'AKHILESH KUMAR YADAV', 'ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA', 'G A']

Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7305

of 2019

Applicant :- Mohit Kumar

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rai,Akhilesh Kumar

Yadav,Arvind Kumar Srivastava,Sanjay Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for

the State.

There is allegation against the applicant of causing dowry death

of his wife by way of smothering.

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail

since 11.05.2015. Trial has not been concluded till date. This is

the first implication of the applicant on account of matrimonial

dispute. He has no criminal history to his credit.

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for

bail.

Regarding long incarceration of under trials prisoners in jail due

to delay in conclusion of trial, the Hon'ble Apex Court in re:

Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme

Court 712 has held in Para 16 of the judgment being reproduced

herein below as follows :-

"This Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty

guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its

protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also

access to justice and a speedy trial. In Supreme Court Legal Aid

Committee Representing Undertrial Prisoners v. Union of India,

it was held that undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained

pending trial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse

consequences of his acts unless the same is established before a

neutral arbiter. However, owing to the practicalities of real life

where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate the risk to

society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial,

Courts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to

be released pending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely

trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered

incarceration for a significant period of time, Courts would

ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail."

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. The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant, Mohit Kumar, involved in Session Trial No.

486 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No. 103 of 2015, under

Sections- 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition

Act, Police Station- Mandawali, District- Bijnor, 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 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 cas