IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV ON THE 2^nd OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 41981 of 2022 Between:-

RAKESH KUMAR S/O LATE SHRI RAMSNEHI NIGAM JATAV, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RAJSAW NIRIKSHAK AMBEDKAR NAGAR WARD NO. 25 POLICE THANA DEHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT (BY MR. VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN - ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE THANA DEHAT ASHOKNAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (BY MR. NAVAL KISHORE GUPTA - PANEL LAWYER)

This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

Heard on this first application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of the applicant.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.454/2022 registered at Police Station Dehat, District Bhind (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 306 and 34 of IPC.

The allegation against the present applicant is that he instigated the deceased - Babita who was daughter-in-law of the applicant to commit suicide.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent Signature Not Verified Signed by: BARKHA and has been falsely implicated. He has further argued that the applicant is 65 years old and is a handicapped person and living seperately, which is evident from the certificate and ration card. Further argument of the applicant is that marriage of the deceased - Babita and Anubhav was solemnized in the year 2012. However, since 2012, the deceased never complained before any authority in respect to the alleged harassment by the applicant. There is nothing on record to show that the present applicant instigated the deceased to commit suicide. Even the prosecution case is considered to be true, the alleged harrasment does not come under the purview of instigation. The applicant is permanent resident of District Bhind and there is no possibility of his absconsion. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Heard the rival contentions and perused the case diary.

I n view of the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Consequently, this application is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant be released on bail, on executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Authority. He shall further abide by other conditions enumerated under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Certified copy as per rules.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BARKHA (SUNITA YADAV)

JUDGE bj/-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BARKHA