High CourtsSingle Bench

Pushpendra vs State Of M.P.

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 30 September 2020 · Citation: (2020) 09 MP CK 0299

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 304B, 498 · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 26229 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

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

12 paragraphs · 679 words

This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. Accused/applicant is in custody since 13.06.2020 in connection with Crime No.268/2020 registered at Police Station Niwadi, District Tikamgarh for the offence punishable under Sections 304- B and 498-A/34 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

As per prosecution story, on 02.06.2020, deceased Vandana Ahirwar committed suicide by hanging. The marg was registered and it is found that the marriage of deceased Vandna was solemnized with the applicant-accused in the year 2014. After four years of marriage applicant/accused and co-accused demanded four wheeler as dowry and due to non-fulfillment of the dowry, they humiliated and tortured deceased Vandana, so she committed suicide.

Learned counsel for the applicant-accused submits that the applicant is husband of the deceased and has falsely been implicated in this case. They residing happily and blessed two daughters. He did not torture and humiliate the deceased. Actually before one day from the date of incident deceased want to go to her parental house but due to COVID-19 Pandemic she could not go parental house, so some dispute arose, therefore, she committed suicide. There is no previous complaint in regard to demand of dowry and cruelty against the applicant-accused. There are general allegations against the present applicant/accused about cruelty and demand of dowry and no specific act is attributed against the present applicant/accused. Charge sheet has been filed. Applicant is in jail since 13.06.2020. He is sole bread earner of his family. Other co-accused has already granted bail by this Court. Due to outbreak of COVID19 pandemic, further proceeding of trial Court is withheld, therefore, trial will take long time for final disposal. There is no probability of absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence by the accused/applicant. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State opposes the said bail application.

Considering the contention of both the parties as well as looking to the fact that the applicants/accused has two daughters, he is sole bread earner of his family, there is general allegations, no specific allegation of demand of dowry is leveled against the applicant-accused, charge-sheet has been filed, he is jail since 13.06.2020, other co-accused has already released on bail by this Court, it is time of covid-2019, further proceeding of trial Court is withheld, therefore, trial will take long time for final disposal. There is no probability of absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence by the accused/applicant, so it is not appropriate to keep the applicant-accused in custody whole the trial, so without commenting on merits of the case, the first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of applicant is allowed.

It is directed that applicant-Pushpendra be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is also directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.

Further in view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID19)' the applicant shall also comply with the rules and norms of social distancing.

Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P. No.01/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority:

1.

The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the applicant by the jail doctor before their release.

2.

The applicant shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

3 . If it is found that the applicant is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing them in appropriate quarantine facility.

Certified copy as per rules. M.Cr.C. is disposed of.