Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Dinesh Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 March, 2015

                           1                      M.Cr.C.No.1802/2015

                              Dinesh Singh
                                   Vs.
                        State of Madhya Pradesh
11/03/2015
      Shri Pradeep Katare, Advocate for the applicant.
      Shri F.A. Shah, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Shri Awdhesh Singh Bhadoriya, Advocate for the complainant.

Heard on bail application.

Case-diary has been perused.

This is the first bail application filed by the applicant (father- in-law of complainant) under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with crime No.52/2015 registered at Police Station Madhoganj District Gwalior for the offence punishable under Sections 384, 498-A, 325 and 323 of IPC.

As per prosecution case, the incident has occurred on 09-02-2015 early in the morning at about 7:00 am and FIR was lodged in noon at 2:45 pm by the complainant Babli Jadon against her husband (Sunil Singh), father-in-law (Dinesh Singh) and brother-in-law (Dewar -Rajkumar) to the effect that she is hunchbacked. Her marriage was solemnized with Sunil Singh on 01-05-2006. After marriage, for a period of 3 years she lived at her matrimonial house happily, thereafter, she was subjected to cruelty on non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, she was taunted 2 M.Cr.C.No.1802/2015 and assaulted by legs and fists by accused persons. It is also alleged that 15 days prior to lodging of FIR, she was beaten by her husband because of that her three teeth were broken and then she was left to her parental house by her husband. "On 09-02-2015 (on the date of lodging of FIR), early in the morning applicant along with other family members came to the house and demanded Rs.2 lacs for keeping hunchbacked complainant with them and on non -fulfillment, second marriage will be performed. On that, Rs.50,000/- was paid by mother of complainant

-Kamlesh to Sunil Singh. Thereafter, all of them have left the house by saying that remaining amount be also made available otherwise they will not spare the complainant and her father".

Prayer for bail was made on the ground that incident of 09-02-2015 has been added with an intent to implicate the accused persons for the offence under Section 384 of IPC. Perusal of that FIR clearly shows that false allegations have been levelled against the applicant. No case for the offence under Section 384 of IPC is made out. Once the complainant was left to her parental house, there was no occasion for the accused persons to visit the house of complainant for the purpose of demanding Rs.2 lacs in dowry. In order to show that prompt FIR has been lodged, this false allegation has been made in the FIR. Apart that, FIR was lodged belatedly and nowhere it has been mentioned that why FIR was not lodged just after happening of 3 M.Cr.C.No.1802/2015 first incident or promptly thereafter. Only omnibus allegations have been levelled against the present applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that deliberately case for the offence under Sections 498-A, 325, 323 and 384 of IPC was registered though the offence under Section 498-A of IPC includes the ingredients of other offences of assaulting. Even after a period of one month deliberately the medial report of complainant has not been produced before this Court. Father of complainant is a police officer, therefore, this false case has been got registered without following the guidelines setup by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another (2014) 3 SCC (Cri.) 449.

Prayer for bail was opposed by the learned Panel Lawyer assisted by complainant's counsel on the ground that looking to the allegations contained in FIR, applicant is not entitled for any anticipatory bail.

After taking into consideration the allegations mentioned in the FIR, this Court is of the view that omnibus allegations were made against the applicant and FIR has been lodged belatedly. Delay has not been explained. Prima facie no offence is made out for the offence under Section 384 of IPC. There is no possibility of absconsion of applicant. In FIR, nowhere it has been mentioned that when complainant was left to her parental house and when & how many times she was beaten by the accused person.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case this Court directs that if the applicant surrenders before the Investigating Officer on or before 25/03/2015 and thereafter on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of concerning Investigating Officer then he be released on bail, subject to compliance of the conditions enumerated under section 437(2) of Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, application is allowed.

C.C. as per rules.

(B.D. Rathi) Judge Anil*