Madhya Pradesh High Court
Neha Singh Ghuraiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 September, 2014
Mcrc.8368.2014
Neha Singh Ghuraiya Vs. State of M.P.
17.09.2014
Shri F.A. Shah, Advocate, for applicant - Neha Singh
Ghuraiya.
Shri Prabal Solanki, P.P., for the respondent/State.
Heard.
Perused the case diary.
This is first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of applicant for grant of anticipatory bail.
Applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.507/2014 registered against her at Police Station Morar, District Gwalior (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 471, 477 and 120B of IPC.
As per prosecution story, FIR was lodged by Smt. Rajni Ghuraiya W/o Vikram Ghuraiya on 12.07.2014 in regard to the incident occurred on 07.07.2014. Author of the FIR i.e. Smt. Rajni Ghuraiya is the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the present applicant. Allegations were made that when the marriage of Smt. Rajni Ghuraiya was solemnized on 07.05.2009, one Alto Car, one Scorpio vehicle and one motorbike were provided to the in-laws as dowry. It is also mentioned in the FIR that later on the Alto Car was sold by playing fraud and making false signatures of Smt. Rajni Ghuraiya by the in-laws and in that incident present applicant Neha Singh Ghuraiya was also involved. This fact came into the knowledge of the complainant on the same day i.e. on 07.07.2014. On that basis offence was registered.
Prayer for bail was made on the ground that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the matter and this fact can very Mcrc.8368.2014 Neha Singh Ghuraiya Vs. State of M.P. well be assessed from the previous order passed by the learned Session Court on 08.07.2014 while granting anticipatory bail to applicant Neha Singh Ghuraiya in Crime No.278/14 which was registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A of IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act on the basis of FIR lodged by the same complainant Smt. Rajni Ghuraiya. But on perusal of the entire order nowhere it was mentioned and nowhere it was argued, though Smt. Rajni Ghuraiya was present in the Court, that the aforesaid Alto Car was sold by the in-laws and in that conspiracy present applicant Neha Singh Ghuraiya was also involved. It is further submitted that when the anticipatory bail was granted vide order dated 08.07.2014 by the Session Court to the present applicant, false report was lodged on 12.07.2014. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, present applicant is entitled to get relief of anticipatory bail.
Though prayer for bail was formally opposed by Shri Solanki, learned Public Prosecutor, but the facts argued by Shri Shah, learned counsel for the applicant, were not countered by the prosecution.
During the course of dictation, learned counsel Shri Awadhesh Singh Bhadoriya appeared before the Court and stated that in this case one counsel Shri V.D. Sharma wanted to argue on behalf of complainant Smt. Rajni Ghuraiya, therefore, order may be passed after lunch, but because of the fact that neither any application to assist the prosecution was filed nor any Vakalatnama was filed on behalf of the complainant nor there is any evidence available on record that learned counsel Mcrc.8368.2014 Neha Singh Ghuraiya Vs. State of M.P. Shri Bhadoriya or Shri Sharma have been allowed to argue the case on behalf of the complainant in this case, hence, objection is hereby overruled.
After taking into consideration the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, application is allowed and it is directed that on or before 08.10.2014, applicant Neha Singh Ghuraiya shall surrender before the investigating officer of the case and thereafter on her furnishing 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, she shall be released on bail. It is further directed that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required and she will co-operate in the investigation. She shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
(B.D. Rathi) Judge pd