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
7 paragraphs · 249 words@JUDGMENT-JUDGMENT
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the mother in law of the victim deceased. The husband being the main accused and the father in law are on bail. The petitioner used to stay at a different place and was in no way responsible for the dispute between the couple and what might have led to the suicide of the victim deceased.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. However, he candidly submits that the statement which implicate the parents of the prime accused of the husband of the victim deceased are of all relatives of the victim deceased. No independent witness came to implicate the present petitioner.
In view of the alleged role ascribed to the present petitioner, we do not think that the custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is required in this case. Accordingly, we allow this application for anticipatory bail.
In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of like amount, one of whom shall be local to the satisfaction of the arresting officer of the case and on condition that the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
The aforesaid order shall be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
CRM 5710 of 2020 and CRAN 4089 of 2020 are disposed of.