Ghanshyam Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 October, 2014

[Cites 5, Cited by 13]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ghanshyam Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 October, 2014

        <font size="4">
    <div style="width: 600px; background-color: white;  height: 500px; margin: 0px auto; word-wrap: break-word;" id="ggg" onkeypress="return  nb(event)" onmouseup="checkStat()" contenteditable="true">
<p style="margin-left: -0.2in; margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 150%; page-break-before: always" align="CENTER">
<font face="Bookman Old Style, serif"><font size="4"><u><b>M.Cr.C
No.16148/2014</b></u></font></font></p>
<p style="margin-left: -0.2in; margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 150%; text-decoration: none" align="LEFT">
   <font face="Bookman Old Style, serif"><font style="font-size: 13pt" size="3"><b><u>15</u><u>.10.2014</u></b></font></font></p>
<p style="margin-right: 0.07in; margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%; text-decoration: none" align="JUSTIFY">
<font face="Bookman Old Style, serif"><font size="3">	Shri Shashank
Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants.</font></font></p>
<p style="margin-right: 0.07in; margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%; text-decoration: none" align="JUSTIFY">
<font face="Bookman Old Style, serif"><font size="3">	Shri Amit Seth,
Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.</font></font></p>

This is first bail application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. The applicant apprehends their arrest for an offence under Sections 366, 376 of IPC in connection with Crime No.525/2014 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Rewa. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that prosecutrix and Amarnath Sharma married in Arya Samaj Mandir, Lohamandi Kilagate, Gwalior and they visited at various places after marriage. It is further said that prosecutrix and Amarnath Sharma filed writ petition No. 2677/2014 before Hon'ble the High Court seeking protection from the police in the light of judgment of Apex Court (Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P) reported in (2006)5 SCC 475 and after such direction marriage was solemnized and after public notice the prosecutrix came back. It is further said that prosecutrix is major and married lady and dispute was filed against her husband seeking maintenance, which was decided vide order dated 31/1/2012. In the said squeal of facts present applicants and other family members were falsely implicated however prayer is made to enlarge present applicants on anticipatory bail. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deem it proper to grant bail to the applicant no.1 Ghanshyam Sharma and applicant no.2 Smt. Annpurna Sharma. They are directed to join the investigation immediately and fully cooperate with the investigating agency and the trial. In the event of arrest, applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/-each with a separate surety of like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer. Conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. shall apply on the applicants during currency of bail. C.c as per rules. (J.K. Maheshwari) Judge tarun/  <object type="application/pdf" id="ggg_object" style="display: none"></object>  </div>

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ghanshyam Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 October, 2014