Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sidharth Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 July, 2019

                                 1         M.Cr.C. No. 25407/19

          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     M.Cr.C. No. 25407/19
                (Sidharth Jain & anr. Vs. State of M.P.)

Gwalior, Dated 1/7/19

      Shri R.K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

      Shri Anoop Nigam, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Shri P.S. Bhadoriya, Advocate for the complainant. Case dairy is perused.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. Petitioners have filed this first application u/S. 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with offence punishable u/S.498-A, 34 of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered as Crime No. 356/2019, by Police Station City Kotwali District Bhind (M.P.).

Learned Panel Lawyer 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.

The petitioners who are aged 58 and 50 years of age and happen to be father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the complainant are alleged with inflicting dowry demand related cruelty. The marriage of the complainant took place on 10/12/17 and arrest in matters of this nature may diminish the possibility of settlement in future.

Considering the above and that the material placed on record does not disclose the possibility of the petitioners fleeing from justice, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the petitioners.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this application u/S. 438 of Cr.P.C. in the following terms.

It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions :-

1. The petitioners will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them;

2. The petitioners will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3. The petitioners 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 petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused;

5. The petitioners will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

6. The petitioners will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;

7. The petitioner No.1 shall appear and mark his presence at the concerned police station one every week, till conclusion of investigation.

8. The petitioners shall plant 100 saplings of indigenous fruit bearing or shady trees on the side of the road/street of the place where the incident took place and take care of the trees for the next one year by watering the plants and by installing tree guards at his own expenses. The petitioners shall file an affidavit disclosing compliance of this condition within 30 days in the Registry, failing which this court may consider cancellation of bail.

The senior most available learned Public Prosecutor of the concerned District is directed to file verification report before the trial Court concerned after carrying out inspection personally or through SHO of police station of the concerned area, disclosing as to whether petitioner has complied with condition No.8 or not, and if yes to what extent?

The learned trial Judge on receiving report of non- compliance of condition No.8 shall forthwith communicate the same to the Registry of this Court.

The Registry on receiving any such report from the trial Court disclosing default shall put up the matter before appropriate Bench in shape of PUD.

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.

Let a typed copy of this order be also supplied to the counsel for the State for compliance of the aforesaid directives.

For the time being this case stands disposed of. C.C. as per rules.

(Sheel Nagu) Judge ojha YOGENDRA OJHA 2019.07.02 10:49:12

-07'00'