AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vivek Rusia, J
This is first application u/s 438 Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends her arrest in connection with Crime No.742/2021
registered at police station Banganga, Indore for the offence u/s304-B, 498-A IPC and u/s 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
As per prosecution story on 17.06.2021 police station Banganga received an information from the hospital that one married lady died during treatment
due to consumption of acid. The Merg was registered and thereafter the statement of parents of the deceased were taken in which they have
disclosed that their daughter Sonali was married with Praveen Solanki in the year 2017 and after one year of marriage the husband, father-in-law,
mother-in-law and two sister-in-laws have started harassing her for demand Rs.2 lakhs and one motorcycle. Due to the aforesaid abetment she
committed suicide by consuming poison. Since the death took place within 7 years of her marriage the offence under section 304-B, 498-A IPC were
registered against five accused persons.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the offence. The applicant being sister-in-law is married
with Rajesh Chouhan and she has two children, out of which one child is aged ten months only. Apart from this learned counsel for the applicant
submits that after the marriage the applicant is residing in Dewas city with her family and the alleged incident took place in Indore city. The allegations
against all the accused are omnibus in nature. No specific act or overt act has been attributed against her, hence prays for the benefit of anticipatory
bail in the matter.
Learned Panel Advocate as well as counsel appearing for the objector oppose the bail application by submitting that presumption under section 304
IPC is unnatural as the incident took place within 7 years of her marriage, therefore, no defence is available to the applicant.
Perused the case diary.
The Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 has observed that in such cases the police is
required to comply with section 41 of the Cr.P.C. The allegations against the applicant and others are omnibus regarding demand of dowry and this
application after marriage is residing in Dewas city.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merit of the case, the application is allowed. The I.O is directed to
issue a notice under section 41 of the Cr.P.C. After issuance of the notice the applicant shall appear before the police station and record her
statements. After recording the statement she shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- with one surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. However, if after receipt of two consecutive notices if the applicant fails to appear before
the I.O she shall not be entitled for the benefit of anticipatory bail and this order shall be treated as cancelled.
C.c as per rules.