Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rambabu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 November, 2019
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1
M.Cr.C. No 48197/2019
(Rambabu Vs The State of M.P. )
Gwalior, Dated : 23/11/2019
Shri Puran Kulshrestha, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri M.M. Tripathi, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent-state.
Case-diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. This is first application u/S. 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the applicant.
Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with offence punishable under Sections 306, 34 of the IPC registered as Crime No. 511/2019 by Police Station- Sabalgarh District Morena (M.P.) Allegation against the applicant in short is that he along with co-accused was involved in subjecting the deceased to cruelty and harassment. Ultimately, on 19/11/2017 deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. On the aforesaid basis, crime has been registered.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is uncle in law of the deceased and he has falsely been implicated in THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 M.Cr.C. No 48197/2019 (Rambabu Vs The State of M.P. ) the matter. He is living separately for many years and he has no concern with the offence. Suicide was committed on 19/11/2017 whereas FIR was lodged after two years i.e. on 02/11/2019. No reason has been assigned for such a huge delay. The basic ingredients of Section 107 of the IPC are not attracted to the facts of this case so as to constitute the offence under Section 306 of the IPC. Applicant is a Government servant and tractor driver. The applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. With the aforesaid submissions, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and prayed for its rejection and it is submitted that name of the applicant figures in the statement of Radheshayam regarding his involvement.
However, it would not be desirable to enter into merits of the rival contentions at this juncture. It is well settled that the considerations governing grant of anticipatory bail are altogether different from those relevant for the prayer for regular bail.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 M.Cr.C. No 48197/2019 (Rambabu Vs The State of M.P. ) Looking to the fact and circumstances, no definite conclusion can be arrived at this stage, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in the opinion of this Court, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
Accordingly, the first bail application preferred by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C stands rejected.
(S.A.Dharmadhikari) JUDGE Prachi PRACHI MISHRA 2019.11.25 15:03:30 +05'30'