High CourtsSingle Bench

Seema vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 23 June 2022 · Citation: (2022) 06 MP CK 0062

HON’BLE JUDGES
Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 354, 354(a), 448, 457, 506 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 30606 Of 2022
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

11 paragraphs · 403 words

Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J

This is the first bail application u/S.438 Cr.P.C filed by the applicant for grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.382/2022 registered at police Station, Thatipur, Distt. Gwalior, for the offrence punishable under Sections 448, 457, 506 of IPC.

As per prosecution story, complainant Bharat Singh Gurjar lodged a report at police Station, Thatipur, against present applicant and one Hameer Singh Gurjar that on 29.5.2022 in the morning at 6 am he along with wife went to his village Kerora after locking the house. When they returned, he found that his son Hameer Singh and his wife applicant/accused Seema, to whom he ousted from the property, in the night broke the lock of the house, entered inside and took possession of the house. They also took away house hold articles. On 1.6.2022 at 7 pm when he tried to enter in his house, his son did not permit him to enter in the house. On his report, crime for the aforesaid offences has been registered.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that relations of present applicant with complainant who is her father-in-law are inimical. In February, 2022 she has lodged a report against complainant Bharat Singh under Sections 354, 354(a), 506, 34 of IPC. She is ready to cooperate in the investigation. It is further submitted that applicant is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court. On such premises, learned counsel for the applicant prayed for bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of the application.

Both the Advocates are heard. Case diary perused.

Looking to the fact that it is a family dispute and applicant is a lady, but without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the application for anticipatory bail should be allowed and by allowing the application it is ordered that in the event of arrest, if applicant furnishes bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority/Investigating Officer, she should be released on bail.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.