Raj Kumar Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 November, 2022

[Cites 4, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Raj Kumar Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 November, 2022

Bench: Vishal Dhagat

                                 1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                                 BEFORE
                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
                      ON THE 25th OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55502 of 2022

        BETWEEN:-
1.      RAJ KUMAR THAKUR S/O TEJ SINGH THAKUR,
        AGED    ABOUT   50    YEARS, OCCUPATION:
        AGRICULTURE R/O VILLAGE SAHAJPURI
        KHURD, P.S. SURKHI, TAHSIL AND DISTRICT
        SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.      BABU SINGH S/O TEJ SINGH THAKUR, AGED
        ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
        R/O VILLAGE SAHAJPURI KHURD, POLICE
        STATION SURKHI, TAHSIL AND DISTRICT
        SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.      CHANDRABHAN S/O TEJ SINGH THAKUR, AGED
        ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
        R/O VILLAGE SAHAJPURI KHURD, POLICE
        STATION SURKHI, TAHSIL AND DISTRICT
        SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                             .....APPLICANTS
        (BY SHRI ALOK VAGRECHA - ADVOCATE)

        AND
        THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
        POLICE STATION SURKHI DISTRICT SAGAR
        (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                            .....RESPONDENT
        (BY SHRI C.P. SINGH PARMAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

      This application has come up for hearing on this day, the court passed
the following:
                                  ORDER

This i s fi rst application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.546/2022 for the offences punishable under Section 306/34 of the Indian 2 Panel Code registered at Police Station-Surkhi, District-Sagar (M.P.).

Learned counsel appearing for applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the case. It is further submitted by him that deceased used to harass a minor girl in family of applicants due to which applicants had rebuked him. There is no instigation or omission on part of applicants so that deceased could have committed suicide. Act of applicants does not have any ingredient under Section 107 of the IPC. Counsel for applicants prays that applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned Government Advocate opposed the bail application. It is submitted that applicants were continuously and consistently harassing the deceased due to which he committed suicide. There is suicide note as well as oral dying declaration made by deceased in which it has been stated by deceased that applicants used to harass and threat him to kill him. In these circumstances, applicants may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the prosecution story, it is found that there was no instigation on part of applicants due to which deceased committed suicide, I find it a fit case where benefit of anticipatory bail can be granted to the applicants. It is directed that in the event of arrest of applicants by the police in the aforesaid crime, applicants shall be released on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one surety and security each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting officer (Investigating Officer) for their regular appearance before the Police during the investigation or before the Court during trial.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicants :

1. The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them;

2. The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3 . The applicants will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. The applicants shall not commit offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5. The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6. The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL DHAGAT) SHABANA ANSARI Digitally signed by SHABANA ANSARI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, postalCode=482001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=4bc06f2e678b75148b60bb7947ee9ffc5ed27ef1f43a5d4d93d2d13dda510735, pseudonym=B646F86821C200C9792A53984F1D0790135DE39A, serialNumber=8A5E15A33816E651B4DB52BF3225281EF6C191F68E5EBE90A6E101CF42422711, cn=SHABANA ANSARI Date: 2022.11.25 11:52:49 +05'30' JUDGE shabana

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court