Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1052 (MP)

Ku. Manisha v. State of M. P.

2012-10-11

SHEEL NAGU

body2012
Judgment Sheel Nagu, J.;- 1. Case Diary is perused Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. 2. The applicant has filed this first application u/S 439, Cr. P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Basai, District Datia in connection with Crime No. 49/2012 registered in relation to the offences punishable u/Ss. 324 and 302 of IPC. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. 4. Considering the facts that applicant is in custody since 25.08.2012 and that the applicant is a woman aged about 17 years and looking to the fact that the main accused Indal is said to have inflicted blow with an Axe and PM report reflects cause of death to be incised wound and that the omnibus allegation against the applicant is of assaulting with Lathi, this Court considering the period of incarceration and the fact that the applicant being a woman, is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. 5. Accordingly, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rs. Seventy Five Thousand only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court. 6. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:- 1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by her; 2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be; 3. The applicant will not indulge herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be; 4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused; 5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be. 7. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be. 7. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance. C.c. as per rules.