Banwari Dhanuk vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

S.A.Dharmadhikari, J

The applicant has filed this second application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn vide

order dt.15.02.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No. 8504/2021.

The applicant has been arrested on 07.12.2020 by Police Station â€" Gormi, District Bhind (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.44/2021 registered in

relation to the offences punishable under Section 394 of IPC.

Allegation against the applicant and other co-accused persons, in short, is that they were involved in subject the deceased to cruelty and harassment

due to inability of the deceased to give birth to a male child even after lapse of 15 years of marriage, due to which she committed suicide on

02.09.2020. On the basis of the aforesaid, crime has been registered.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is aged about 62 years and is father-in-law and he has been falsely implicated in the case.

He is in custody since 07.12.2020. Omnibus allegations have been levelled against him. The ingredients of Section 107 of IPC are not present in the

present case so as to constitute offence under Section 306 of IPC. The applicant being senior citizen is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that in view

of outbreak of COVID 19, detention of the applicant in already congested prison may be detrimental. The applicant is a permanent resident of District

Bhind and there is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail

is made.

Learned Panel Lawyer opposed the application by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for

grant of bail is made out. It is also submitted that the deceased had called his father one day before she died and disclosed that all of them have

harassed her and beat her. According to post mortem report, ante mortem injuries were found all over the body. Just for the purpose of erasing the

evidene, she has been burnt. On earlier occasion also these persons used to harass her but compromise was recorded before the Panchayat. In such

circumstances, involvement of the present applicant can not be ruled out. On such grounds, he prays for rejection of the bail application.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations levelled against the applicant

and gravity of offence, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

The application, accordingly, stands dismissed.