AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G.S. Solanki, J.—Heard finally. This is the first application filed by applicants u/s 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
Applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 167/13, registered at police station Majhauli, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under sections 498-A, 506, 324, 34 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicants submit that applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant No. 1 is husband, applicant No. 2 is brother-in-law (jeth) and applicant No. 3 is sister-in-law (jethani) of complainant Tarannum Nisha. It is further submitted that it is a matter of matrimonial case and in the event of arrest of the applicants, the possibility of compromise will be diminished between the parties therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the applications.
I have perused the case diary wherein it is specifically alleged against applicant No. 1 Tahir Hussain (husband) that he poured the kerosene oil and set to ablaze the complainant Tarannum.
In these circumstances, no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail to applicant No. 1 Tahir Hussain. The application in respect of applicant No. 1 is hereby dismissed.
As far as case of applicant Nos. 2 and 3 is concerned, there is only general allegation regarding cruelty made against them therefore, I am of the view that it is a fit case to release them on anticipatory bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, this application in respect of applicant Nos. 2 and 3 is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest applicants Jabir Hussain and Kaushal Bano shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with a surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting officer/competent Court.
The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. They shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
In view of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, , it is directed that this order shall remain in force till the end of trial, if the applicants furnish 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, the public prosecutor or complainant would be at liberty to move the same Court for cancellation or modifying the conditions of bail any time if liberty granted by the Court is misused.
It is also clear that if the committal Court/trial Court issues an arrest warrant against the applicants due to their absence before the Court, then in such event this order be deemed ineffective. C.C. as per rules.