Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Bhagwati Dhakad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 January, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.2398/2022
Smt. Bhagwati Dhakad Vs. State of M.P.
Through Video Conferencing
Gwalior, Dated: 17/01/2022
Shri F.A. Shah, Counsel for applicant.
Ms. Kalpana Parmar, Counsel for State.
Case diary is available.
This fourth application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been
filed for grant of bail. The previous bail applications of the applicant
were dismissed by the coordinate Bench of this Court, however, on
account of transfer of Hon'ble Judge, this application has been placed
before this Court.
The applicant has been arrested on 7/4/2020 in connection with
Crime No.20/2020 registered at Police Station Gaswani, Sheopur for
offence under Sections 302, 294, 34 of IPC.
It is submitted that the evidence of main witness Ramesh
chandra has been examined and he has supported the prosecution
case. The allegations are that the dispute arose on the question of
raising of wall by the complainant. It is alleged that the applicant and
co-accused persons caught hold the deceased, whereas Raghuveer
Dhakad assaulted on the head of the deceased by means of an axe.
The applicant is a lady and in the present scenario, her bail
application may be considered sympathetically.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the
counsel for the State. It is submitted that the second bail application
of the applicant was dismissed on merits by order dated 16/2/2021
ARUN KUMAR
MISHRA
18.01.202211:02 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.2398/2022 Smt. Bhagwati Dhakad Vs. State of M.P. passed in M.Cr.C. No.8786/2021 and the third bail application was withdrawn after recording of evidence of Ramesh chandra and merely because the main witness has been examined, cannot be a ground to grant bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. In view of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Mamta Nair Vs. State of Rajasthan and another reported in (2021) 7 SCC 442, in which it has been held that the merely because the main witness has been examined cannot be a ground to grant bail, no case is made out for taking any contrary view in the matter.
Accordingly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Arun* ARUN KUMAR MISHRA 18.01.2022 11:02