MOHAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard with the aid of case diary This is first application filed under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail, as the applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.176/2023 registered at Police Station Bagchini, Morena, District Morena (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Ss. 498-A, 304-B, 34 of IPC and Sec. 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) Prosecution case, in brief, is that, applicant's brother Chandrapal Jatav was married to deceased on 20/6/2020. After marriage, applicant, co-accused Chandrapal Jatav and other co-accused persons started dowry demand cruelty with deceased; due to which, on 25/6/2023, she committed suicide by hanging. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is brother-in-law (devar) of the deceased. There was a dispute between the applicant's brother/co-accused Chandrapal Jatav and his wife deceased, due to which, she committed suicide. Omnibus allegations with regard to demand of dowry and dowry demand cruelty have been made against the applicant. He has falsely been implicated only because he is brother of co-accused Chandrapal Jatav. He further submits that on the date of incident, brother of deceased and her sister were present at the time of preparation of naksha panchayatnama but they did not make any allegation with regard to demand of dowry or dowry demand cruelty against the applicant. It has nowhere specifically been mentioned as to who demanded the dowry and how much amount was demanded. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances, applicant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that during the postmortem examination, injuries were found on the body of the deceased. Admittedly, the applicant and other co-accused persons were residing with the deceased in the same house and were present at the time of incident. The offence alleged against the applicant is serious in nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Having considered the rival submissions, material pointed out by learned counsel for applicant specifically with regard to date of incident and the date of recording of marg statements of family members of deceased so also the nature of allegations alleged against the applicant, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to the enlarged on anticipatory bail hence, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

(3.) It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000.00(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer for his appearance before the Trial Court on all dates and for complying with the conditions enumerated in sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. M.Cr.C. stands disposed of, accordingly. Certified copy, as per Rules.