Smt. Ramlaxmi vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

This second application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant apprehends her arrest in connection with Crime No.424/2020 registered at Police Station Dehat, District Bhind for offence under Sections 304(B), 498-A, 34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that while arguing the first bail application, this Court has considered the age of the applicant, which was mentioned in the medical prescription. However, now the applicant has filed the copy of the Aadhar Card as well as Samagra ID to show that she is aged about 60 years.

It is further submitted that so far as the allegation of demand of bullet motorcycle and an amount of Rs.1 Lac is concerned, the same is false, even otherwise bullet motorcycle was to be used by the son of the applicant and not by the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant herself is medically ill and her treatment is going on.

Per contra, the application is opposed by the counsel for the State. It is submitted by the counsel for the State that the marriage of the deceased took place with the son of the applicant on 11/05/2018 and within two years she committed suicide on 15/06/2020. There are specific allegations of demand of bullet motorcycle and an amount of Rs.1 Lac.

It is further submitted in the light of judgment passed by Supreme Court in the case of Taramani Parakh Vs. State of M.P. reported in (2015) 11 SCC 260, it is clear that prima facie offence is made out against the applicant.

Considering the fact that the applicant herself had disclosed her age to her treating doctor as 48 years during her treatment and the Aadhar Card is not the authentic document of proof of date of birth of the holder of the Aadhar Card, coupled with the allegations made against the applicant, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

It is, accordingly, rejected.