Hemraj @ Hemu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

This second application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by the applicant, who is implicated in connection with

Crime No.426/2019 registered at Police Station Barnagar, District Ujjain (MP) for offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The applicant is in custody since 27.10.2019.

As per prosecution case, on 30.04.2019, on the basis of information given by Manish Gosar s/o Chandrashekhar, Ward Boy of Gita Hospital,

Barnagar, a murg was registered in respect of death of Pawan s/o Ishwarlal Patidar, who was brought in the Hospital due to consumption of five

celphos tablets, Murg No.45/2018 was registered at Police Station Barnagar, District Ujjain (MP). And during the course of murg inquiry, statement of

the family members of the deceased Pawan was recorded and in the statement, it has come on record, that the deceased committed suicide on

account of illicit relation of his wife Maya Patidar with Hemraj Kandare (the present applicant). Hence, the case has been registered against the

applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in the present

crime. Allegation against the applicant is that he was having illicit relationship with wife of deceased Pawan. The applicant and Maya (wife of the

deceased) threatened him not to come in their relationship and due to which, he has committed suicide. However, during his life time, the deceased

has not made any complaint against the applicant regarding the aforesaid fact. It is further submitted that extra marital relationship of his wife, may be

a reason to commit suicide for the deceased, but it cannot be said that the applicant provoked or instigated the deceased to commit suicide. The

applicant is in custody since 27.10.2019. The investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed. The conclusion of the trial will take

considerable time. There is no possibility of his / her absconsion or tampering with the evidence, if enlarged on bail. Under these circumstance, learned

counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the applicant

on bail; hence the application filed by the applicant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting on the

merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his / her furnishing a personal

bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his / her

regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and

shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Certified copy, as per rules.