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

2022 Supreme(MP) 1128

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J.
Narvadi Bai Lodhi & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 58828 of 2022
Decided On : 13-12-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Sameer Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate, Sushant Tiwari, Advocate
Final Result : Allowed

Grant of anticipatory bail based on the lack of prior complaints regarding cruelty, harassment, and dowry demands before the death of the deceased, and the false and omnibus nature of the allegations in the FIR.

Headnote:

Anticipatory Bail - Dowry Harassment - The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners in connection with a case registered under Sections 304-B, 34 of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, considering the lack of prior complaints regarding cruelty, harassment, and dowry demands before the death of the deceased, and the false and omnibus nature of the allegations.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners filed for anticipatory bail in connection with a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 34 of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The prosecution alleged that the deceased and her daughter were found dead near a river, and a FIR was registered against the husband and other family members for dowry harassment.

Finding of the Court:

The court, without commenting on the merits of the case, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, considering the lack of prior complaints regarding cruelty, harassment, and dowry demands before the death of the deceased, and the false and omnibus nature of the allegations.

Issues: The main issue was the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in a case involving dowry harassment and the death of the deceased and her daughter.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of prior complaints regarding cruelty, harassment, and dowry demands before the death of the deceased, and the false and omnibus nature of the allegations in the FIR.

Final Decision: The court allowed the application for anticipatory bail and ordered that the petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority, while also abiding by the conditions of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT

Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J. - This is first application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.216/2022 registered at Police Station Maksoodangarh District Guna (MP) for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 34 of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. In brief case of the prosecution is that on 15.09.2022, complainant Laakhan Singh gave an information to ASI Jitendra Singh Police Station Maksoodangarh District Guna that on 14.09.2022 at 7:30 pm when he was at his house, his brother Maakhan Singh informed him that his wife and one and a half years old daughter are not at home, without informing anyone, they left the home. They searched them in the village and also house of their relatives but they could not be traced. They also informed her parental home. On receiving the information, her brother Manoj and Yogesh came there. Thereafter, brother of complainant Maakhan Lodhi consumed some poisonous substance due to which his condition became serious and he was taken for treatment. On 15.09.2022, during search dead body of deceased Priya and her daughter was found near the bank of Parvati River. Thereafter, police was informed. On the information, Dehati Merg No.0/2022 was recorded. On the basis of Dehati Merg, Merg No.21/2022 was registered. Dead body panchnama of both the dead bodies was prepared. Dead bodies were sent for postmortem. As per postmortem report, both the deceased died due to asphyxia which led to shock and cardio respiratory arrest. During merg inquiry, statements of father and brother of deceased were recorded in which they stated that marriage between deceased and Maakhan Lodhi was solemnized on 28.01.2019. After marriage upto six months, her in-laws looked after the deceased well and thereafter started demanding a plot. On their demand, father of deceased gifted a plot to his daughter. Thereafter upto 2-3 months, in-laws of deceased looked after the deceased well and afterwards they started harassing her on account of demand of a plot again. On the basis of merg inquiry, FIR bearing crime No.216/2022 of the offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 34 of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was registered against husband, mother-in-law, bother-in-law (Jeth) and sister-in-law (Jethani) of the deceased.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent. Any complaint whatsoever regarding cruelty, harassment and dowry demand had never been made before the death of deceased. False FIR has been registered making false and omnibus allegation not only against husband but even the petitioners herein. Husband of the deceased himself lodged missing report of his wife and daughter. Petitioners being lady may not be able to bear rigors of incarceration. Hence, it is prayed that petitioners may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed this anticipatory bail application and prayed for its rejection.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and considered the arguments advanced by them and perused the record.

7. Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the application should be allowed and by allowing the application it is ordered that in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority.

8. Petitioners shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

9. With the aforesaid directions, the present application stands allowed and disposed of.

Certified copy/e-copy 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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top