Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ganpat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 January, 2020
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C. No.53902/2019
Ganpat Vs. State of MP
Indore Dated 31/01/2020 :-
Shri KK Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri R.S Darbar, learned counsel for the respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
1. This is first application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C in crime no.321/2019 under section 307/34 of the IPC registered at police station Padana SarangpurDistrict Rajgarh.
2. According to the prosecution case, both the complainant and the petitioner were agreed for marriage of their children (daughter of the complainant and son of the petitioner). The petitioner was insisting upon for an early marriage; while the complainant was not in a position for the same. A dispute arose between both of them on this account, which is outburst in the form of alleged incident. The petitioner along with his son went to the field of complainant. They embroiled in some dispute. The petitioner caught the complainant and his son gave repeated blows of knife on abdomen, neck, face and back of the complainant. On her screams, co-villagers and passerby rushed there and rescued her.
3. On medical examination, Doctor observed five incise wounds near right ear, neck, nose and left side of the chest caused by sharp and hard object. Injuries were observed grievous in nature.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that complainant Lalkuwar Bai agreed to marry her daughter with son of the petitioner Babulal and in lieu thereof, she accepted Rs.1,30,000/- cash and one kg silver. Later, she refused for the marriage, therefore, the petitioner and his son demanded their money/silver back but she was not returning the same. When they repeatedly pressed their demand, she foisted the present false case against them. No allegation except that he caught the complainant has been made against the petitioner. He has not inflicted any injury. He is a 65 years old man and languishing in jail since 30.08.2019. The petitioner has no criminal record. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Therefore, he be granted bail.
5. Prosecution has opposed the prayer but has not controverted the fact HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE M.Cr.C. No.53902/2019 Ganpat Vs. State of MP that the allegation against the petitioner is that he caught the complainant and his son inflicted knife.
6. In view of the nature and gravity of the incident, act attributed to the petitioner coupled with the period of custody and other facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it proper to release the accused on bail. Therefore, without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed.
7. It is directed that the petitioner Ganpat S/o Motilal be released from custody on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs.Twenty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court as and when required further subject to the following conditions:
(I) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments on frivolous grounds to protract the trial;
(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly allure or make any inducement, threat or promise to the prosecution witnesses, so as to dissuade them from disclosing truth before the Court;
(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or involve in any criminal activity;
(iv) In case of his nvolvement in any other criminal activity or breach of any other aforesaid conditions, the bail granted in this case may also be cancelled.
(Virender Singh) Judge sourabh Digitally signed by SOURABH YADAV Date: 2020.01.31 14:34:46 +05'30'