High CourtsSingle Bench

Reena Jadaun vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 8 November 2019 · Citation: (2019) 11 MP CK 0065

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.A. Dharmadhikari, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294, 323, 452, 506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 46137 Of 2019
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

14 paragraphs · 517 words

This is first application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The applicant apprehends her arrest in connection with Crime No.522/2019 registered at Police Station- Kotwali, District-Ashoknagar for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 323, 294, 506 and 34 of the IPC.

Allegations against the applicant, in short, that applicant's husband has given a love letter to the complainant's daughter which has been seen by the complainant's husband. On showing that letter to the applicant, the applicant alongwith her husband entered into the house of the complainant and started abusing as well as beating the complainant, due to which, the complainant received injuries on the shoulder. On the basis of aforesaid, crime has been registered against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a woman aged about 31 years and she is also a government servant working on the post of Constable who has been falsely implicated in the matter. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that due to previous animosity with the applicant's husband, the applicant has been implicated. The applicant is a permanent resident of District- Ashoknagar. There is no likelihood of her absconsion, if she is granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. She is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for anticipatory bail is made.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent/State that investigation is pending and custodial interrogation may be required in the matter.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest of applicant, she shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by applicant:-

1.

The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by her;

2.

The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3.

The applicant will not indulge herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4.

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused;

5.

The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6.

The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be. Certified copy as per rules.