Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shakuntala Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 July, 2024
1 MCRC-24229-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 16th OF JULY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 24229 of 2024
SHAKUNTALA SHARMA AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri N.S. Ruprah with Shri B.K. Vaishya - Advocates for the applicants.
Shri A.S. Pathak - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri K.K. Pandey - Advocate for the objector.
ORDER
This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.286/2024 registered at Police Station - Waidhan, District Singrauli (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Section 304-B, 498-A, 34 of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Applicans are in custody since 23.02.2024.
2. As per the prosecution story, it is alleged that applicant and co-
accused persons were harassing deceased physically and mentally for demand of dowry due to which deceased committed suicide by hanging herself, therefore, aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicant and co-accused persons.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the matter. The applicant No.1 Signature Not Verified Signed by: MOHD MOHSIN QURESHI Signing time: 7/19/2024 4:11:45 PM 2 MCRC-24229-2024 is the mother-in-law (Saas) of the deceased whereas the applicant No.2 is the father-in-law (Sasur) of the deceased. The deceased had illicit relations with one Bibhuti Narain @ Neeraj Pandey. The parents of deceased have performed marriage of deceased with Deepak Sharma against will of deceased and even after marriage, the deceased was in contact with her lover Bibhuti Narain @ Neeraj Pandey. In this regard, he has drawn the attention of this Court on Whatsapp chat (Annexure A/2). The father of deceased has also lodged report against Bibhuti Narain @ Neeraj Pandey because he used to harass and torture the deceased. It is further submitted that deceased has also written to her husband in which she has disclosed her affair with Bibhuti Narain @ Neeraj Pandey and in that letter, no allegation regarding demand of dowry has been mentioned. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to CD transcript between deceased and her husband and has submitted that even in this recording, demand of dowry is not mentioned. It is further submitted that there is no role of both the applicants in the alleged offence. Charge sheet has been filed. They have no criminal record. The applicants are in custody since 23.02.2024. The trial of the case will take considerable long time. Therefore, it has been prayed that the applicants may be released on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the objector has opposed the bail application to the applicants and has submitted that marriage of deceased was performed with Deepak Sharma on 01.06.02023 and in that marriage ornaments, marriage articles including car Grand Vitara was also given. The applicants have continuously harassed the deceased. Present applicants and other co-
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MOHD MOHSIN QURESHI Signing time: 7/19/2024 4:11:45 PM3 MCRC-24229-2024 accused caused injury to the deceased and after commission of murder of deceased, her body was hanged but the police did not register the case under Section 302 of IPC. In this regard, father of deceased has filed complaint for fair investigation before Higher Police Authorities and a writ petition was also filed before this Court. In this matter, videography of post mortem report was not conducted by the Medical Board. It is submitted that modesty of the deceased was outraged by Bibhuti Narain @ Neeraj Pandey, therefore father of deceased was filed complaint against him. It is further submitted that deceased had not written the letter to her husband about disclosing her affair with Bibhuti @ Neeraj Pandey and that document has been falsely created by the applicants. The document is not even the part of charge sheet. It is further submitted that from the statements of witnesses, it is proved that present applicants have committed aforesaid offence, therefore prayed for rejection of bail application of applicants.
4.1 By placing reliance on the decisions of Apex Court in AIR 2024 SC 2885 (Ajwar vs. Nazim & Anr.), AIR 2024 SC 2724 (Sukhpal Singh vs. NCT of Delhi), AIR 2024 SC 2682 (Rajendra vs. State of Maharashtra), AIR 2024 SCW 2647 (Aqeel Ahmad vs. State of U.P. & Anr.), AIR 2021 SC 2616 (Gurmeet Singh vs. State of Punjab), AIR 2022 SCW 364 (Manoj Kumar Khokhar vs. State of Rajasthan), AIR 2023 SC 3547 ( Rohit Bishnoi vs. State of Rajasthan), AIR 2023 SC 2352 (Atulbhai Vithalbhai Bhanderi vs. State of Gujarat) and AIR 2018 SC 599 (Lachhman Dass vs. Resham Chand Kaler), learned counsel for the objector has prayed for rejection of bail to the applicants.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MOHD MOHSIN QURESHI Signing time: 7/19/2024 4:11:45 PM4 MCRC-24229-2024
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for State has submitted that applicants were living with Deepak (husband of deceased) and deceased and they are the main accused alongwith Deepak. Hence, he prayed for rejection of bail application of the applicants.
6. Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to release the applicants on bail.
7. Accordingly, present MCRC stands dismissed.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL) JUDGE mohsin Signature Not Verified Signed by: MOHD MOHSIN QURESHI Signing time: 7/19/2024 4:11:45 PM