Asma Bee W/O Abdul Rauf vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Sujoy Paul, J

This is the first application filed by the applicant / accused under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.408/2021 registered at Police Station â€" Betma, District â€" Indore for the

offences registered under Section 304-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is mother-in-law of deceased â€" Samreen W/o Salman who allegedly consumed poisonous

substance / sulphas and died on 15.06.2021. Since death took place within seven years from the date of marriage, the applicant has been falsely

implicated. The applicant belongs to a renowned family. The applicant is a law abiding citizen. Applicant has cordial relation with the deceased which

is reflected from Annexure-P/4, a High School Certificate of examination year 2021 which shows that the family permitted the deceased to prosecute

her study. The applicant's family is financially well off and having car, motorcycle etc. The question of any demand of dowry does not arise. The

applicant's son, husband and other family members have already been arrested. The applicant has to take care of children of deceased. The applicant

will not influence the material / evidence. She will co-operate with the investigation. Hence, she may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

The prayer is vehemently opposed by learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent / State by contending that no prompt efforts were made by the family

members to take the deceased hospital. The delay was a main factor for her death.

The Apex Court has laid down broad parameters for the purpose of considering an anticipatory bail application.

The Apex Court in (2011) 1 SCC 694, (Siddharam Sadingappa Mehtre v/s The State of Maharashtra) laid down following parameters for grant of

anticipatory bail:-

The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail:

(i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made;

(ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a court in

respect of any cognizable offence;

(iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice;

(iv) The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or other offences;

(v) Where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her;

(vi) Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people;

(vii) The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role

of th accused in the case. The cases in which the accused is implicated with the help of Sections 34 and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 the court should

consider with even greater care and caution because overimplication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern;

(viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors, namely, no prejudice should be

caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused;

(ix) The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant;

(x) Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant

of bail and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an

order of bail.

Arrest should be the last option and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative in the facts and

circumstances of that case. The court must carefully examine the entire available record and particularly the allegations which have been directly

attributed to the accused and these allegations are corroborated by other material and circumstances on record.-

Emphasis supplied:

The applicant is aged about 50 years. The main accused Salman and applicant's husband are already in custody. The applicant will not be able to flee

from justice. There is no likelihood of committing similar offence again. There is nothing to suggest that applicant will be able to influence the material

/ evidence.

Considering the aforesaid coupled with the fact that the applicant is aged about 50 years and she has to look after the children of the deceased, I deem

to proper to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the application for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed.

In the event of arrest, the applicant â€" Asma Bee W/o Abdul Rauf be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer for her appearance before

the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation as and when directed. Conditions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. shall also apply on the

applicants during currency of bail.

With the aforesaid, the application stands disposed of.

Certified copy, as per Rules.