RINKU Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is first application filed by the applicant under Sec. 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail relating to FIR No. 03 of 2024 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind (M.P.) for the offence under Ss. 304- B, 498-A read with 34 of IPC and Sec. 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. Further submission is that he is uncle of husband of the deceased and is residing in Jaipur having no involvement in day to day affair of the family of the deceased who resided at Village Maghan, Police Station Mau, District Bhind. There is nothing on record to show that on the date of incident or soon before the death present applicant was present at the place of occurrence. In support of his arguments, counsel for the applicant filed certain documents i.e. Jan Aadhar Card, driving license, voter card and certificate of Development Committee, Daulatpura Road, Benad, Jaipur (Rajasthan) in which the address of present applicant is mentioned as Naya Kheda, Jaipur. It is further argued that even prosecution witnesses in their statement have not alleged that present applicant who is Chachiya Sasur was present at the place of incident. It is further argued that applicant is the permanent resident of District Jaipur (Rajasthan) and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Under these circumstances, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State vehemently opposed the bail application and prays for its rejection.