Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhagwan Lal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 March, 2015
M.Cr.C. No. 1090/ 2 0 1 5
(Bhagwan Lal Vs. State of M.P. )
03/03/2015
Shri Arun Pateriya, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri M. Bhardwaj, P.P. for the respondent/State.
Heard.
This is the first application for anticipatory bail filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with crime No. 44/2014 registered at police station Civil Line, District Morena for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Session trial No. 257/2014 is pending before the 4th ASJ, Morena.
On behalf of the applicant document No. 1478/2015 has been filed which is copy of judgment dated 31.10.2014 passed in Session trial No. 257/2014, State Vs. Smt. Rachna Bai and others.
It is alleged that daughter of Ramprakash, Mamta is married to applicant's son Rajkumar in the year 2008. On 11.09.2013. Mamta died on her matrimonial house in suspicious circumstances.
It is alleged that the applicant, father-in-law, husband Rajkumar and brother-in-law Rajveer, sister-in-law Rachnabai and mother-in-law Bhuribai allegedly harassed the deceased- Mamta. Mamta has two daughters and a son. On 13.09.2013 information was received that Mamta has been burnt and is admitted in Gwalior hospital. There was a mark on her neck and head. After merg inquiry, case was registered.
M.Cr.C. No. 1090/ 2 0 1 5(Bhagwan Lal Vs. State of M.P. ) On behalf of the applicant, it is submitted that Session trial No. 257/2014 has been decided by 4th ASJ, Gwalior on 13.10.2013 in which statements of PW/1, Ramvilas, the uncle of deceased, PW/2, Radhakishan, the cousin brother of deceased- Vijay PW/3, PW/6 Ramprakash and PW/7 Bhuri, mother of the deceased have stated that after the marriage of Mamta, she was being properly treated at her matrimonial home. While preparing food in electric heater, due to electric current she was electrocuted accidentally.
In the post mortem report the team of doctors opined that death of deceased was due to cardio respiratory failure as a result of electrocution and its complications.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application on the ground that the statements recorded in the trial Court are against the applicant, Rachna and Rajveer only. It is also submitted that a superficial ligature mark was found on the body of deceased, therefore, prayed for rejection of the application.
Keeping in view the statements of PW/1, PW/2, PW/3, PW/6 and PW/7 which is reported in paragraph 12 of the judgment, but without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that applicant make himself present before the Arresting Officer within 10 days from today and in the event of his arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac Only) M.Cr.C. No. 1090/ 2 0 1 5 (Bhagwan Lal Vs. State of M.P. ) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer.
The applicant is directed to join the investigation immediately and to fully co-operate with the investigation. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub- section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
In view of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Vs. State of Maharastra and other JT2010 (13) SC 247, this order shall remain in force till the end of trial. However, the applicant has to furnish a fresh bail bond and surety before the trial Court after filing of the challan.
C.C. as per rules.
(S. K. Palo) Judge neetu