Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Krishna Devi Rajput vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 May, 2015
M.Cr.C. No.6449/2015
06.05.2015
Shri Y.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant-accused.
Shri D.K. Paroha, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Case diary is available.
This is first bail application filed by the applicants-accused under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.222/2015 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Damoh for offences under Section 498A/34 IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant-accused No.1 Krishna Devi Rajput being the mother-in- law and the applicant-accused No.2 Rajbahadur Singh being the father-in-law of the complainant Smt. Sangeeta Singh whose marriage was solemnized with Diwakar Singh, son of the applicants-accused, have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegations made in the report are totally false and concocted. A written report was submitted by the complainant to the Superintendent of Police, Katni on 19.3.2015 whereupon an FIR bearing Crime No.0/15 for offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act was registered at Police Station, Sleemnabad where the parents of the complainant have been residing. Counsel further contends that the applicants-accused reside at Damoh. The complainant M.Cr.C. No.6449/2015 has not made any complaint at Damoh where the alleged offence was committed against her by the applicants-accused. The alleged offences are not punishable with the imprisonment of more than seven years and arrest of the applicants-accused is not required in this case because there is no kind of recovery to be made from the applicants-accused in this matter. On the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel has prayed for grant of bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposing the submissions made on behalf of the applicant-accused has prayed for rejection of the bail application.
On bare perusal of the case diary, it is evident that the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the son of the applicants-accused. Matrimonial house of the complainant is at Damoh where no complaint was made by the complainant regarding harassment by the applicants-accused for demand of dowry. The report was lodged by the complainant at her parental house. There is no kind of recovery to be made from the applicants-accused in this case.
Considering the punishment prescribed for the offences involved in this case and the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and others, 2014 (8) SCC 273, this Court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. Hence, allowing this application, it is ordered that in the event of arrest by the arresting officer or by M.Cr.C. No.6449/2015 the court, the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds for the sum of Rs.25,000/- with separate sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the court. The applicants are directed to join the investigation immediately and fully cooperate with the investigating agency and the trial. The applicants shall abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(M.K.Mudgal ) Judge YS/