Sunita vs State Of M.P

Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J

This is first application under Section 438 of CrPC for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.47/2021 registered at Police Station Dimni, District Morena for offence under

Sections 304(B) and 34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant â€" Smt. Sunita that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. She has been falsely

implicated. She has not committed any offence. The deceased committed suicide by hanging. It is further submitted that co-accused Bheemsen and

Baliram, who are the father-in-law and husband of the deceased respectively, have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court and case of

the present applicant is also on the same footings. Hence, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and prayed to reject the anticipatory bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length through VC and considered the arguments advanced by them and perused the available record.

Considering the fact that co-accused Bheemsen and Baliram have already been granted anticipatory bail, without commenting on merits of the case,

the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, present applicant be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority/Investigating Officer.

Applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required. She shall further abide by other conditions

as enumerated under sub-Section 2 of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

This MCRC stands allowed and disposed of.

Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.