Madhya Pradesh High Court
Indira Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 January, 2022
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C. No.62096/2021
(Indira Bai and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)
-1-
Indore, dated 13/01/2022
Shri Avinash Sirpurkar, learned Senior Counsel with Shri
Bablu Patel, learned counsel for the applicants.
Ms. Harshlata Soni, learned panel lawyer for the
respondent/State.
This first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.691/2021 registered at police station- Kanadiya, District-Indore for the offence punishable under sections 304-B, 498-A and 34 of IPC.
02. As per the prosecution story, the deceased was married on 13.11.2019 with Vishal and the present applicants are mother-in- law and father-in-law of the deceased respectively. The accused persons were demanding dowry of Rs.5-10 lacs from the deceased and tortured her mentally and physically. The deceased was beaten also by the accused persons. In the F.I.R., it was alleged that mother-in-law had broken mobile phone of the deceased and deceased was not allowed to talk to her family members. Due to this harassment, the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself on 11.11.2021 and accordingly, F.I.R. was registered against the accused persons.
03. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this crime. They have not committed any offence and they have been maliciously confined in the above mentioned offence. The applicants are aged about 52 and 56 years respectively and they are HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE M.Cr.C. No.62096/2021 (Indira Bai and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh) -2- suffering from multiple diseases. The F.I.R. does not reveal that deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her death. The applicants are permanent residents of district-Indore. There is no possibility of absconsion of the applicants or tempering with the witnesses. Under these circumstances, he prays that the applicants be granted anticipatory bail.
04. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection.
05. Perused the case-diary as well as the impugned order passed by the trial court.
06. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and gravity of the allegation and also taking note of the fact that death of the deceased is an unnatural death that too within seven years of her marriage with the co-accused Vishal. Hence, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that at this stage, no case is made out to grant benefit of anticipatory bail to the present applicants. The present application for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.
C.C. as per rules.
(Anil Verma) Judge N.R. Digitally signed by NARENDRA KUMAR RAIPURIA Date: 2022.01.14 14:39:52 +05'30'