Back
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Tarun Kumar Kaushal, J.
Geeta Vishwakarma - Appellant
Versus
Deepak Vishwakarma - Respondent
M.Cr.C. No. 5496-2014
Decided On : 17-06-2014
Cancellation of Bail - Threat Calls - Summary: The court considered the petition for cancellation of bail based on the respondent/husband's alleged continuous threat calls to the complainant/wife and breach of bail conditions. The court found that the allegations were related to a purely matrimonial dispute and that the respondent was granted bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. The court emphasized the need for proper follow-up on complaints by the complainant and directed the authorities to take appropriate steps on each complaint.
Fact of the Case:
The petition was filed for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent/husband, citing continuous threat calls to the complainant/wife and breach of bail conditions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the case did not appear to be a fit one for cancellation of bail, considering the purely matrimonial nature of the dispute and the pending civil case for divorce between the parties. The court emphasized the need for proper follow-up on complaints by the complainant and directed the authorities to take appropriate steps on each complaint.
Issues: Cancellation of bail, continuous threat calls, breach of bail conditions
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of the allegations, the grounds for granting bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., and the pending civil case for divorce between the parties. The court emphasized the need for proper follow-up on complaints by the complainant and directed the authorities to take appropriate steps on each complaint.
Final Decision: The petition for cancellation of bail was disposed of, with the court emphasizing the need for proper follow-up on complaints by the complainant and directing the authorities to take appropriate steps on each complaint.
Tarun Kumar Kaushal, J.
1. Heard.
2. Present petition has been preferred for cancellation of bail which was granted by the Special Judge, Jabalpur on 28.2.2014 pertains to the crime No. 134/2014 of AJAK, Jabalpur.
3. Ground of cancellation of bail is that after granting bail, the respondent/husband is continuously giving threat calls to the complainant/wife and he is committing breach of the conditions. Learned counsel submits that on receipt of every such threat, complainant made complaints to police also but was of no avail.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/accused submits that allegations are false and the allegations of second marriage is also false. Respondent was granted bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. after suffering four days custody in the matter which was purely matrimonial dispute and the civil case for divorce is still pending between them and this series of complaint endless.
5. Considering the aforesaid, I find it does not appear to be a fit case for cancellation of bail. However, with a view to respect the rights of the complainant, complainant is expected and directed to properly follow up each and every complaint made by her and authorities are expected to take proper steps on each and every complaint and proceed them according to law.
6. Petition is disposed of.
7. C. c. as per rules.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
