Hemlata vs State of M.P.

Sujoy Paul, J.—Heard. In this application preferred u/s 438 of Cr.P.C., the applicant, a woman of 30 years has prayed for anticipatory bail. Vide crime No. 203/12 the offence u/s 328 /34 of IPC is registered at P.S. Dabra, district Gwalior against the applicant.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.

The case of the complainant is that on 03/03/2012, the applicant gave some "prasad" to the complainant, which was containing some poisonous element. Because of the same, the complainant and her family members became unconscious and when they became normal, they found that certain valuable items were not there in the house. They narrated the date of incident as 03/03/2012 and further stated that considering their physical condition, they were admitted in Dabra Hospital, therefrom they were referred to Government hospital, Gwalior. In Gwalior hospital, they were admitted for four days and then were discharged. However, admittedly, the FIR was registered on 15/03/2012. Thus, prima-facie it appears that the complainant and her family members were getting treatment for 4 days from 03/03/2012 and thereafter they belatedly lodged FIR on 15/03/2012.

Considering the aforesaid, I deem it proper to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. The applicant is a woman and therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant-Hemlata shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with a solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority.

The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. She shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, , it is directed that this order shall remain in force till the end of the trial, if the applicant furnishes the bail bond and surety bond before the committal Court/trial Court at the time of filing of challan as per the terms and conditions as mentioned above.

However, it is made clear that if the committal Court/trial Court issues an arrest warrant against the applicant due to her absence before that Court, in that event, this order be deemed ineffective.

M. Cr. C. is allowed. Certified copy as per rules.