SANGITA Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Applicant Sangita w/o Ashutosh Shukla has moved the application for grant of bail being implicated in Range case No. 930/2009 registered by City, District Dewas for offence under Sections 302, 394, 201 and 120-B of the IPC.

(2.) Counsel for the Applicant has vehemently argued that it was a case of false implication. Even if the prosecution allegations are considered, Counsel has stated that the Applicant is not named in the FIR and the case is based purely on circumstantial evidence. Even if the basis for which the Applicant has been implicated is considered, witness Ajit Sachan had merely seen the co-accused and it cannot be presumed that the co-accused have conspired for murder. Merely because the Applicant Sangita was evicted from the premises by the husband of the deceased, which has been stated to be the reason for the cause of murder, Counsel urged that it is quite far-fetched. Counsel has also urged that the Applicant is 45 years old lady and she had two children aged 7 and 4 years, who are students and there is nobody to look after them at the moment; since, the husband and her brother have already been arrested and made co-accused in the case. Even if the prosecution allegations are considered, Counsel countered that offence under Section 120-B of the IPC for conspiracy can only be levelled against the Applicant and there is not evidence on record to implicate the present Applicant. Hence, Counsel has prayed for grant of bail.

(3.) Counsel of the objector has raised strong objections for grant of bail,stating that the lower Court itself had rejected the bail application of the present Applicant thrice. So also Counsel has stated that no sympathy should be wasted on the present Applicant for her being a lady or the fact that two children are dependent on her since the Applicant is the mastermind behind the triple murder of Manju Jaiswal, Rishika and Devanshu,who were murdered in most brutal way by Ashutosh Shukla, the husband of the Applicant and Narendra Solanki, the close relative of the present Applicant. Moreover, Counsel has stated that the objector, the husband of the deceased Mr. Rajesh Jaiswal was receiving threats from the relatives and members of the family of the present Applicant and he has duly filed complaint before the police station and authorities concerned, copies of which are filed along with the objection. Moreover, Counsel has stated that the objector has lost his wife and his two children and there was ample evidence on record to prove the same. He has vehemently stressed the fact that for offence under Section 120-B of the IPC, a person, who is a party to the criminal conspiracy is equally liable for the offence committed i.e. murder in the present case. Hence, Counsel stated that the Applicant does not deserve any sympathy and he has prayed for dismissal of the application.