Geeta Jha vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Satyendra Kumar Singh, J

Case diary is available.

The is is first application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail, as the applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.57/2023 registered at Police Station Alampur Bhind, District Bhind (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Prosecution story, in brief, is that applicant's son - Pramod was married to the deceased Ragini on 02.05.2022. After the marriage, the applicant and other co-accused persons started demanding dowry from the deceased and harassing her physically and mentally due to which on 06.06.2023, she died in suspicious circumstances within seven years of her marriage.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per prosecution case itself, deceased was died due to cardio respiratory failure due to severe anemia. She was undergoing treatment since 20.05.2023, therefore, allegations alleged against the applicant and other co-accused of committing her murder by giving some poisonous substance is false. Deceased's brother in his complaint dated 06.06.2023, no where stated that the applicant and co-accused persons demanded dowry from the deceased or her parents. Omnibus allegations with regard to harassment were made. Deceased's friend Jyoti in her statement recorded during investigation narrated entirely different story wherein it is mentioned that the applicant was having illicit relationship with the husband of the deceased. The co-accused Sanjiv (husband of applicant) has already been granted regular bail by this Court by order dated 27.07.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No.32727/2023. The whole prosecution story is doubtful. Her custodial interrogation is not required. Trial will take time to conclude and, therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances, applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State has vehemently opposes the application and prays for its rejection. He submits that the offences alleged against the applicant are of serious in nature, therefore, she is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Having considered the rival submissions, material produced on record, postmortem report of the deceased so also other facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to the enlarged on anticipatory bail hence, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

I t is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, she shall be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one 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. M.Cr.C. stands disposed of, accordingly. Certified copy, as per Rules.