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
7 paragraphs · 263 wordsB. K. Shrivastava, J
Heard on the filed filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C on 25.09.2020 on behalf of the applicant Yuvraj Bisen, who is under apprehension of his arrest in connection with Crime No.406/2020, registered at Police Station Lalbarra, District Balaghat (M.P.) for the offence under Section 306 of IPC.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. No any ingredient is found related to section 107 of IPC, therefore, offence is not made out. Any evidence is not available against the applicant, therefore, he should be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
On the other side, State strongly opposed the application. It is submitted that the investigation is going on and the custodial interrogation is also required from the accused. Deceased was the girl aged about 24 years. The counsel for the State also read out the statement of Shalu who was room mate of the deceased.
It appears from the record that the deceased was a girl aged about 24 years. The accused was having relationship with the deceased since two years back. The deceased became pregnant. The accused denied to marry her, thereafter she committed suicide by jumping into canal. A girl who was unmarried became pregnant. Therefore, the act of the accused was sufficient to abate her to commit suicide because there was no way for the deceased.
Therefore, looking to the overall circumstances of the case, in Digitally signed byview of this Court the applicant is not entitled to get the anticipatory bail.
Hence bail application is dismissed.