Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/44928/2020 of MEGH SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2020
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.44928/2020 ( Megh Singh vs.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C.44928/2020
( Megh Singh vs. State of M.P. )
Gwalior, Dated: 31/12/2020
ShriRajiv Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Anand Pathak, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.
Matter is heard through Video Conferencing.
This is the first bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C filed by theapplicant for grant of bail.
Applicant has been arrested on 09.10.2020 by Police StationMahua, District Morena (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.58/2020registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A, 34 of IPC and section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant-MeghSingh, who is father-in-law of the deceased that the applicant is incustody since 09.10.2020. There is no need of custodial interrogation.The conclusion of trial will take its own time. It is further submittedthat marriage of the deceased was performed in the year 2018.Thereafter, the deceased, who is daughter-in-law of the presentapplicant committed suicide by hanging. Earlier there was nocomplaint with regard to demand of dowry. The applicant hassubmitted documents with regard to separate living as the presentapplicant is father-in-law and resides separately, hence prayed forgrant of bail. He further undertakes to abide by all the terms andconditions of guidance, circulars and directions issued by Central Government, State Government as well as Local Administrationregarding measures in respect of COVID-19 Pandemic and maintainhygiene in the vicinity while keeping physical distancing.
Per contra, State Counsel as well as counsel for thecomplainant has vehemently opposed the bail application and hassubmitted that in the statement under section 161/164 of Prosecutionwitnesses have specifically stated that the present applicant has alsocommitted offence under sections 304-B and 498-A, 34 of IPC andsection ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act. Ante-mortem injuries werefound on the body of the deceased. Hence, prayed for dismissal ofthe bail application.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length through VideoConferencing and considered the arguments advanced by them andperused the available case-diary.
In view of the aforesaid and considering the facts andcircumstances of the case and the fact that the present applicant isfather-in-law aged around 55 years and is in custody since 9.10.2020,trial will take its own time, considering the fact of aged and the thefact that the present applicant is not main accused, withoutcommenting upon the merits of the case, the application is allowedand it is hereby directed that the applicant shall be released on bail onhis furnishing personal bond of Rs.Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Laconly) with one solvent surety of thelike amount to the satisfaction ofthe Court concerned for his regular appearance before the Court concerned on the dates fixed by the Court concerned.
In view of COVID-19 pandemic, the Jail Authorities aredirected that before releasing the applicant, his/herCorona Virus testshall be conducted and if it is found negative, then the concernedlocal Administration shall make necessary arrangements for sendingthe applicant to his/her house, and if his/her test is found positive thenthe applicant shall be immediately sent to concerning hospital forhis/her treatment as per medical norms. If the applicant is fit forrelease and if he/she is in a position to make his/her personalarrangements, then he/she shall be released only after taking duetravel permission from local administration. After release, theapplicant is further directed to strictly follow all the instructionswhich may be issued by the Central Government/State Governmentor Local Administration for combating the COVID-19. If it is foundthat the applicant has violated any of the instructions (whether generalor specific) issued by the Central Government/State Government orLocal Administration, then this order shall automatically lose itseffect, and the Local Administration/Police Authorities shallimmediately take him/her in custody and would send him/her to thesame jail from where he/she was released.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of thefollowing conditions by the applicant/s :-
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/s will comply with all theterms and conditions of the bond executed byhim/her;
2. The applicant/s will cooperate in theinvestigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant/s will not indulgehimself/herself/themselves inextendinginducement, threat or promise to any personacquainted with the facts of the case so as todissuade them from disclosing such facts to theCourt or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant/s shall not commit an offencesimilar to the offence of which he/she is accused;
5. The applicant/s will not move in the vicinityof complainant party and applicant/s will not seekunnecessary adjournments during the trial;
6. The applicant/s will not leave India withoutprevious permission of the trial Court/InvestigatingOfficer, as the case may be; and
7. The applicant/s will inform the SHO ofconcerned Police Station about his/her/theirresidential address in the said area and it would bethe duty of the State Counsel to send E-copy of thisorder to SHO of concerned Police Station forinformation.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned forcompliance, if possible for the office of this Court.
Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.
vv
(Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava)
Judge
Digitally signed by SMT
VALSALA VASUDEVAN Date: 2021.01.01