Madhya Pradesh High Court
Banmali Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 September, 2015
M.Cr.C.No.9288/2015 (Banmali Ahirwar Vs. State of M.P.)
1
14.9.2015.
Shri Raja Sharma, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri R.P.Gupta, Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Heard.
Perused the case diary perused.
This is first bail application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.194/2015 registered at Police Station, Kotwali, District Datia, for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A/34 of IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
As per prosecution case, on the information of Medical Officer, District Hospital, Datia, that Smt. Aneeta wife of Chandrashekar has been brought dead, Merg No.26/15 was recorded and enquiry was conducted. During enquiry, statements of the parents and other relatives of the deceased were recorded. They disclosed that marriage of the deceased was solemnized with Chandrashekhar on 7.4.10. After marriage, applicant and other in-laws of the deceased used to harass her in connection with demand of dowry. Fed up with the harassment, the deceased committed suicide by hanging. Hence, offece has been registered against the applicant and co-accused.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant, M.Cr.C.No.9288/2015 (Banmali Ahirwar Vs. State of M.P.) 2 who is father-in-law of the deceased, has falsely been implicated in the case. He has not committed any offence. No injury has been found over the body of the deceased. Only omnibus allegation has been levelled against the applicant. It is further submitted that applicant is an old person of 65 years of age. Charge-sheet has been filed in the matter. The applicant is in custody since 23.6.2015 and trial is likely to take time. In such premises, applicant prayed for bail.
The prayer is opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant, but without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending M.Cr.C.No.9288/2015 (Banmali Ahirwar Vs. State of M.P.) 3 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.C. as per rules.
(Sushil Kumar Gupta ) Judge ms/-