SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(MP) 1482

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT GWALIOR BENCH
Sheel Nagu, J.
Kiran Bala - Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh - Respondent
M.Cr.C.No.10167-2014
Decided On : 05-11-2014

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Raja Girraj Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Shri Girdhari Singh Chauhan, Panel Lawyer.

Grant of interim anticipatory bail based on nature of allegations and potential impact of arrest in offences of this nature, along with imposition of specific conditions for release on bail.

Headnote:

Anticipatory Bail - Offence u/S. 498-A/34 of IPC - Allegation of dowry demand related cruelty - Interim anticipatory bail granted to mother-in-law and sister-in-law - Conditions imposed for release on bail

Fact of the Case:

Applicants sought anticipatory bail in connection with offence u/S. 498-A/34 of IPC registered at Police Station Vidisha, District Vidisha. State opposed the bail application, citing lack of case for grant of interim anticipatory bail.

Finding of the Court:

Considering the allegation of dowry demand related cruelty made against the applicants, the Court extended the benefit of interim anticipatory bail to the applicants to avoid arrest that may diminish possibility of settlement in future. The Court directed the release on bail with specified conditions.

Issues: Apprehension of arrest in connection with offence u/S. 498-A/34 of IPC, grant of interim anticipatory bail, opposition by the State, and conditions for release on bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court considered the nature of the allegations, the possibility of settlement, and the potential impact of arrest in offences of this nature in granting interim anticipatory bail. The Court imposed specific conditions for release on bail to ensure compliance and cooperation in the investigation/trial.

Final Decision: The Court granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicants and directed their release on bail with specified conditions.

JUDGMENT :

Case Diary is perused.

2. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with offence punishable u/S. 498-A/34 of IPC registered as Crime No.633/2014 at Police Station Vidisha, District Vidisha.

3. Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposed the said IA and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of interim anticipatory bail is made out.

4. Considering the allegation of dowry demand related cruelty made against the applicants, who are mother-in-law and sister-in-law respectively, where the marriage had taken place about two months back and arrest in offences of this nature may diminish possibility of settlement in future, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of interim anticipatory bail to the applicants. Accordingly, without expressing opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow the said IA in the following terms.

5. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on bail till final disposal of the present bail application on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority.

6. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicants :-

1. The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed 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, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from 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/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.

C.c. as per rules.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top