Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/52251/2018 of AJAY SEN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018
Court Of Madhya PradeshThe High Court Of Madhya Pradesh MCRC-52251-2018 (AJAY SEN
The High Court Of Madhya PradeshMCRC-52251-2018
(AJAY SENVs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
[31][-][12][-][2018]Jabalpur, Dated :
Shri Pramod Thakre, learned counsel for the applicants.
Shri Aditya Narayan Gupta, learned GA for the respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is first application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. Applicants Ajay Sen andSmt. Krishna Bai were arrested on 12/12/2018 in Crime No.271/2018 registered atPolice Station Garhakota, District-Sagar (M.P) for the offences punishable underSections 304-B/34, 498-A of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
As per the prosecution case, on 22/06/2018 deceased Madhvi Sen wife of theco-accused Anil Sen set herself ablaze after pouring kerosene, due to which shesustained burn injury and died due to that burn injuries during treatment on22/06/2018 i.e. within one year of her marriage. It is alleged that the applicants whoare respectively the brother-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased Madhvi Senand co-accused Anil Sen, husband of the deceased demanded dowry and used toharass her, due to which she committed suicide.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have notcommitted any offence and have falsely been implicated in the offence. In the dyingdeclaration o f t he deceased recorded by police, it i s mentioned that deceasedsustained injury due to accident. Even in the statements of Smt. Manju Sen andRavindra Sen parents of the deceased recorded by police on 18/06/2018, it ismentioned that the deceased Madhvi Sen sustained burn injury due to accident. Theapplicants are in custody since 12/12/2018 and the conclusion of trial is likely totake long time, hence prayed for release of the applicants on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed theprayer and submitted that sufficient evidence is available against the presentapplicants to connect them with the crime, so applicants should not be released onbail.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and as to the fact that theapplicants are in custody since 12/12/2018 and conclusion of trial will take time, sowithout commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed andapplicants- Ajay Sen and Smt. Krishna Bai are directed to be released on bail upon Only) with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concernedCourt for their appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed inthis behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the followingconditions by the applicants :
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 applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bondexecuted by them;
2. The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicants will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threator promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade himfrom disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused;
5. The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court, as the case may be.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY)V. JUDGE
PrachiDigitally signed by PRACHI KUNTE Date: 2019.01.03 11:11:17 +05'30'