Laxmi Rao Sharma vs State Of M.P

S.A.Dharmadhikari, J

The applicant has filed this fourth application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. First and second applications were dismissed as

withdrawn vide orders dt.09.02.2021 and 24.03.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.7087/2021 and 16154/2021 and third application was dismissed on merits

vide order dt.04.05.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.21604/2021.

The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.746/2020 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Ashoknagar in relation to the

offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 294, 34 of the IPC.

Prosecution story, in short, is that on 7/12/2020 complainant along with her husband had gone to the house of co-accused Manoj Sharma for

demanding the EMI of the loan taken by the latter from a Bank. However, instead of repaying the EMI, Manoj Sharma and the present applicant who

is his wife abused them filthily. On being objected to, present applicant pushed the complainant due to which she fell on the ground and caught hold of

both her hands, while co-accused Manoj Sharma stabbed her with a long knife causing several injuries to her. As complainant's husband Sachin came

forward to her rescue, co-accused Manoj Sharma stabbed him repeatedly on stomach, ribs, back and waist due to which he died on the spot. The

incident was witnessed by Shivangi Jain and Naitik Jain.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is a lady and has been falsely implicated in the case. She is in custody since 10.12.2020.

Charge-sheet has been filed. No further custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has two sons, one of whom is disabled and there is no one to

look after them. She is not alleged to have caused any injury either to the complainant or to the deceased. Applicant being a lady is entitled to the

benefit of section 437(1) of the Cr.P.C. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. Owing to COVID-19 outbreak, conclusion of trial is likely to take time

and detention of applicant in already congested prisons may be detrimental. There is no likelihood of her absconsion or tampering with the prosecution

evidence and she is ready to abide by the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of

bail is made.

On the other hand, learned State Counsel 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 submitted that this is a case of direct evidence. Besides, material witnesses are yet to be examined.

On such grounds, learned State Counsel prays for rejection of the bail application.

The prayer of the applicant has already been considered and rejected on merits vide order dated 04.05.2021 (Supra). Learned counsel for the

applicant has not been able to point out any material change in the circumstances of the case so as to take a different view of the matter at this stage.

The application, accordingly, stands dismissed.