Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt.Kamla Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 June, 2014
1
Smt. Kamla Bai and Another Vs. State of M.P.
M.Cr.C.No.3992/2014
23/06/2014
Shri Vibhav Kumar Advocate for the applicants.
Smt. Sangeeta Pachori Govt Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with offences punishable u/Ss. 353, 332 and 452/34 of IPC registered as Crime No.118/2014 at Police Station Kurwai, District Vidisha.
Learned Government Advocate for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
Applicants apprehend arrest in respect of offences u/Ss. 353, 332 and 452/34 of IPC where both the applicants are woman aged about 63 and 35 years who are alleged with house trespassing, giving abusive words and causing minor injury to the complainant who is government servant and impulse more than intent seems to be the foundation of the incident and since there are no criminal antecedents, this Court, without 2 Smt. Kamla Bai and Another Vs. State of M.P. M.Cr.C.No.3992/2014 expressing any opinion on merits of the case, is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicants.
Accordingly, bail application u/S 438 Cr.P.C is allowed in the following terms.
It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties of the like amount in case of each of the applicants to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority.
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 bonds 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused;
5. The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicants will not leave India without previous 3 Smt. Kamla Bai and Another Vs. State of M.P. M.Cr.C.No.3992/2014 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.
(Sheel Nagu) Judge ar