Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sanjeev Verma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2020
Author: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-5335-2019
(SANJEEV VERMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
1
Gwalior, Dated:14.02.2020
Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the applicant.
Smt. Gaytri Survay, learned Public Prosecutor, for the
respondent/State.
Case diary is perused.
This is first application u/S. 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant apprehend his arrest in connection with Crime No.28/2020 registered at Police Station City Kothwali, District Bhind for offence under Sections 498A, 323, 506/34 of IPC and Section 3 / 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has not committed any offence. There is no demand of dowry. Applicant is working as Constable in ITBP and presently posted at District Kondha, Chattisgarh. The wife of the applicant is also a lecturer and posted at Ater, District Bhind. The wife of the applicant is residing separately since one and a half years. One petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and another application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been filed by the wife of the petitioner as she does not want to resides with the applicant. There is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case. Hence, prayed for grant of The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh MCRC-5335-2019 (SANJEEV VERMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH) 2 anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the bail application and stated that the applicant committed cruel behaviour to his wife and he is not keeping his wife with him and prays for rejection of the bail application.
Considering the facts advanced and looking the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, present applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer).
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-Section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
3. The applicant will not indulge himselves in extending The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh MCRC-5335-2019 (SANJEEV VERMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH) 3 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 applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance as well as copy of the order be given to the learned Public Prosecutor with a direction to keep the same in the concerned case diary.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA)
mani JUDGE
SUBASRI MANI
2020.02.17
10:45:41
-08'00'