High CourtsSingle Bench

Ganesh Bai vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 5 July 2021 · Citation: (2021) 07 MP CK 0035

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satyendra Kumar Singh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 438(2) · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294, 323, 324, 506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.31381 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

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

22 paragraphs · 415 words

Satyendra Kumar Singh, J

This is the first bail application filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in

connection with Crime No.146/2021 registered at Police Station Mungwani, District Narsinghpur for commission of offences punishable under

Sections 294, 323, 324, 506 and 34 of IPC.

As per prosecution story, co-accused persons Ashok Patel, Anand and Sunil Patel, committed assault by using Baka and Iron instrument Panja on

Santosh @ Santram, Sandeep, Babu Lal and Saroj Bai, by which they sustained serious injuries while applicant Ganesh Bai alongwith co-accused

Tulsa Bai and Uma Bai committed assault with kicks and fists. The accused persons have also threatened to the complainant party to their life.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that she is a woman and is unable to cause assault as alleged by the prosecution. The complainant party

were aggressive and committed assault to applicant's brother-in-law Sunil and caused serious injuries to him at the instance of the complainant party.

Police has also registered crime against the complainant party. The applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case on the

reasons of revenging way. On these grounds the prayer is made to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

Per-Contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and submits that complainant and other

injured persons were assaulted by dangerous weapons and Sandeep got serious injuries and is still undergoing treatment.

As mentioned in the impugned order, co-accused Tulsa Bai and Uma Bai have already been released on bail, so having considered the contentions of

learned counsel for the parties, looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and allegations made against the applicant, I am of the

considered view that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this

application is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, she shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail upon her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer for her

appearance before the trial Court on all dates and for complying with the conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

Certified copy as per rules.