Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Nandita Dubey, J.
Roshan Koshre – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 2581 of 2023
Decided On : 24-01-2023
Bail Application - Criminal Law - The court allowed the bail application of the applicant, who was accused of offenses under Sections 304-B, 498-A of IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, considering the fact that the applicant was in custody for a significant period, only a portion of witnesses had been examined, and the trial was likely to take a long time to conclude.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a repeat bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. after his earlier bail applications were dismissed. He was in custody in connection with a case where his newly married wife died due to consumption of poison, and he was accused of offenses related to cruelty and dowry demands.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application, noting that the applicant was in custody for a significant period, only a portion of witnesses had been examined, and the trial was likely to take a long time to conclude.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail despite the serious nature of the charges against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the length of time the applicant had been in custody, the progress of the trial, and the likelihood of a prolonged trial in reaching its decision to grant bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
JUDGMENT
Nandita Dubey, J. - The applicant has filed this repeat (4th) bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. His earlier bail applications MCRC No.53083/2019, MCRC No.50762/2020 & MCRC No.57779/2021 were dismissed as withdrawn vide dated 7.2.2020, 9.6.2021 and 25.3.2022 respectively.
2. The applicant is in custody since 7.11.2019 in connection with Crime No.289/2019 registered at Police Station Lanji district Balaghat for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A of IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. This is a case where newly married girl died due to consumption of poison. Present applicant is the husband of the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that present applicant has been falsely implicated. He has not committed any cruelty with the deceased nor asked for dowry. Referring to the statement of brother of the deceased, who has been examined as PW-1, it is stated that the marriage of the applicant with the deceased was solemnized in the Samuhik Sammelan. In such circumstances, there was no question of demand of dowry. It is further pointed out that when the deceased Gayatri died, present applicant was at Hyderabad, whereas deceased Gayatri died at Village Gondiya.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application. It is submitted that the deceased Gayatri died within five months of her marriage. It is alleged against the present applicant that he tortured and beaten his wife Gayatri at Hyderabad. It is further pointed out that in the postmortem report, the cause of death was poison.
6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case diary, it seems that when the deceased Gayatri died, present applicant was in other State and at the time of her death, she was at her maternal house, as according to the record, her brother had taken her to the hospital.
7. Considering the fact that the present applicant is in custody since 7.11.2019 and only 12 witnesses out of 28 have been examined till date and the trial may take a long time to conclude, without commenting into the merits of the case, this application is allowed.
8. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is further directed that the applicant shall also comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
The court's decision highlighted the importance of considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, as well as the circumstances of the case, in granting bail. It also emphasized the need to imp....
The court has the discretion to grant bail to the accused, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court affirmed that bail should be granted when the investigation is complete and the accused poses no flight risk, emphasizing the non-punitive purpose of pre-trial detention.
The presumption of a 'dowry death' under Section 304B IPC should be tested in trial and is meant to act as a deterrent to the demand of dowry.
The absence of a viscera report and specific allegations of dowry demand, along with the applicant's clean criminal history, justified the granting of bail.
The court established that allegations of dowry death require clear and specific evidence of harassment and cruelty, and the absence of such evidence can lead to the granting of bail.
The court considered the proximity of alleged cruelty to the death and lack of specific allegations regarding dowry demands in granting bail to the petitioner.
In a case of dowry death, the accused is entitled to bail if the allegations against him are general in nature and the prosecution has not shown any proximity of harassment with the suicide.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
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
