Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/52661/2018 of RAMVALLABH SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018
No. 52661/18 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No. 52661/18
M.Cr.C. No. 52661/18
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHM.Cr.C. No. 52661/18
(Ramvallabh Sharma Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated 31/12/18
Shri Nitin Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Abhishek Mishra,learned Public Prosecutor for therespondent/State.
With consent heard finally and perused the case diary.
This is the first application preferred by the applicant u/S.438of Cr.P.C. wherein he is apprehending his arrest in connectionwith offence punishable u/Ss. 306, 34 of IPC registered as CrimeNo.693/2018 at Police Station Cant District Guna.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant thatdeceased was son-in-law of the present applicant. Marriage ofapplicant's daughter solemnized in May, 2018 with the deceased.Due to incompatibility and demand of dowry, daughter of applicantcame back to her maternal home and when deceased tried toforcibly take the daughter away, then she filed a complaint u/S.352 and 504 of IPC which was registered as non cognizableoffence information report u/S. 155 of CrPC. Daughter of applicantalso sent a notice of divorce to the deceased as she did not wantto continue in marital relationship with the deceased. Mobile cliprecovered from the possession of the deceased also indicates thatnotice of divorce and police complaint by the daughter of applicantwas the reason (as per deceased) for committing suicide. Seekinga legal remedy of divorce cannot be a ground to implicate theapplicant. He is a government teacher and confinement wouldbring social disrepute and professional inconvenience. Under thesecircumstances, he seeks anticipatory bail.
On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed theprayer and on the basis of case diary prayed for dismissal of theapplication.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for theapplicant as well as fact situation of the case, without expressingany opinion on the merits of the case, this Court intend to allowthis bail application. It is directed that applicant shall be releasedon bail in case of his arrest on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solventsurety in the like amount to the satisfaction of ArrestingAuthority/Investigating Officer.
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. Applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of thebond executed by him;
2. Applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the casemay be;
3. Applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement,threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts ofthe case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts tothe Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be.
4. Applicant will not commit an offence similar to the offence ofwhich he is accused;
5. Applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during thetrial; and
6. Applicant will not leave India without previous permission ofthe trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
M.Cr.C. No. 52661/18
7. Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and would make himself available for interrogation as and when requiredby the police.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned forcompliance.
C.c. as per rules.
ojha
(Anand Pathak)
V. Judge
YOGENDRA OJHA 2018.12.31 16:11:19 -08'00'