AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 369 wordsSunita Yadav, J
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail relating to FIR No.473 of 2023 registered at Police Station- Kailaras, District Morena (M.P.) for the offence under Section 306, 498-A read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.
Allegations against the applicant/accused, in short, are that the applicant who is mother-in-law used to harass and persecute the deceased in connection with demand of dowry and illness. Being fed up of persistent harassment, she committed suicide by hanging herself.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no evidence on record to show her connection with the crime. She is permanent resident of District Morena and there is no chance of her absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is further submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to co-operate in the investigation and shall abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court; therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the State on the other hand vehemently opposed the application by submitting that deceased was suffering from many diseases at the time of marriage of applicant's son, therefore, mother-in-law always used to say to the family members of deceased to take her to her parental home. The active role has been found of the applicant in harassing and persecuting the deceased. The applicant is not cooperating in the investigation and absconding; therefore, it is prayed that the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant may not be granted.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.
On considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case particularly the nature of allegation as well as gravity of offence and the role played by the applicant, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case, in which anticipatory bail may be granted to the present applicant.
Consequently, this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant is hereby dismissed.