Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhola Ram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 June, 2024
Author: Roopesh Chandra Varshney
Bench: Roopesh Chandra Varshney
1 MCRC-22811-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
MCRC No. 22811 of 2024
(BHOLA RAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 24-06-2024
Shri D.S.Rajawat - Advocate for the applicant.
Mrs.Kalpana Parmar - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail relating to Crime No.9/2024 registered at P.S.- Mahila Police Thana, District Guna (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 376(2) (N), 366, 344, 341, 506 and 323 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that there is no role attributed to present applicant and the FIR has been lodged against him with the malafide intention. Further submission is that prosecutrix is legally wedded wife of applicant but she is second wife because first wife has been died. Prosecutrix quarrels with applicant and hence, she registered the FIR against him. It is further submitted that applicant is permanent resident of District Guna (M.P.). It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant is ready and willing to co-operate in the investigation and shall abide b y all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court; therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that it is a named FIR and investigation is in progress; therefore, he may not be granted anticipatory bail.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary Signature Not Verified Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN ANSARI Signing time: 25-06-2024 03:08:21 PM 2 MCRC-22811-2024 available on record.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments, this Court is not inclined to grant benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant even on the ground of marriage with the complainant.
Hence, the first anticipatory bail application of the applicant is hereby dismissed.
(ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY) V. JUDGE Adnan Signature Not Verified Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN ANSARI Signing time: 25-06-2024 03:08:21 PM