Neha @ Khushabu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

This is first application under Section 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.1391/2019, registered at Police Station-Banganga

District-Indore, for commission of the offences under Sections 302 and 120/34 of the IPC.

As per prosecution story, it is alleged that the applicant was having illicit relationship with deceased-Pramod Singh. Later on, she developed

relationship with co-accused-Aryan @ Ritesh and got married with him. But, deceased-Pramod Singh pressurising the applicant to continue

relationship with him, therefore, the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons Naveen Kushwaha @ Piddu and Aryan committed the murder of

Pramod Singh.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is a youth lady of aged about 28 years and she has falsely been implicated in the present

crime. There is no eye witness of the alleged incident and the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. It is alleged that the

applicant was having illicit relationship with deceased-Pramod Singh. Later on, she developed relationship with co-accused-Aryan @ Ritesh and got

married with him. But the deceased pressuring the applicant to continue relationship with him, therefore, the present applicant alongwith other co-

accused persons Naveen Kushwaha @ Piddu and Aryan committed the murder of Pramod Singh. However, no article belongs to the deceased has

been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is no evidence that the deceased was last seen together in the company of the applicant.

No blood stained clothes or any weapon used in the alleged offence has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Only one Activa scooter

has been recovered from the possession the applicant, in which the co-accused-Naveen took the deceased with him, however, it is not sufficient to

connect the applicant with the alleged crime. The applicant is implicated in the present case on the basis of her disclosure statement recorded under

Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which is not legal evidence. The applicant is in custody since 15/12/2019 and she is not required for

further interrogation. There is no possibility of her absconsion or tempering with the evidence. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the

applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor 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 on 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 the trial Court for her regular

appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that she shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide

by the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

In case of bail jump this order shall become ineffective.

Certified copy as per rules.