Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/51544/2018 of MAMTA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018
No. 51544/18 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No. 51544/18
1
M.Cr.C. No. 51544/18
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHM.Cr.C. No. 51544/18
(Mamta Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated 31/12/18
Shri Rajiv Jain, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Abhishek Mishra, learned Public Prosecutor for therespondent /State.
Shri T.C. Narwariya, learned counsel for the complainant.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.
This is the first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. onbehalf of the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 30/8/18 inconnection with Crime No.216/2018 registered at Police Station BhontiDistrict Shivpuri for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 324,342, 294 and 506/34 of IPC.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant thatnarration of the FIR recorded by the deceased Devendra and anothereye-witness Kiran do not attribute the role of present applicant to theextent of causing any injury which proved fatal in respect of deceasedDevendra. Role of present applicant Mamta has been referred to theextent of assaulting the deceased Devendra alongwith other co-accusedwith Lathi. Role attributable to cause injuries fatal to life were caused byKallu, Deep Singh and Phool Singh and not by the present applicant.Charge-sheet has already been filed and confinement since 30/8/18amounts to pre trial detention. Due to personal rivalry and souredrelationship, applicant has been falsely implicated. She undertakes tocooperate in the investigation.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State on the basis ofcase diary opposed the bail application and prayed for dismissal of bailapplication.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for theparties as well as the fact that confinement amounts to pretrial detention, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, theapplication filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directedthat the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond inthe sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac Only) with one solventsurety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for herregular appearance before the trial Court on the condition that she shallremain present before the Court concerned during the trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of thefollowing conditions by the applicant:-
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by her;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as thecase may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge herself in extending inducement,threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of thecase so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Courtor to the Police Officer, as the case may be.
4. The applicant will not commit an offence similar to the offenceof which she is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments duringthe trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permissionof the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. The applicant shall mark her attendance before theconcerned Police Station on every Monday between 10 amto 2 pm till conclusion of trial and shall regularly appearbefore the trial Court.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
ojha
YOGENDR
(Anand Pathak)
V. Judge