Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1023 (MP)

Siyadevi v. State of M. P.

2014-08-14

D.K.PALIWAL

body2014
JUDGMENT 1.Heard. This is first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 2. The applicant has been arrested in Crime No. 236 of 2013 registered at Police Station, Dimani, District Morena, under Sections 304-B. 498-A/34 of IPC. 3. As per the prosecution case, Smt.Suman was brought to hospital in a burnt condition. She was referred to District Hospital, Morena. Thereafter, she was referred to Gwalior. Her dying declaration was recorded by the Executive Magistrate on 2.8.2013. Thereafter, another dying has been recorded on 17.8.2013. During treatment Suman died on 29.8.2013. Marg was recorded. During investigation it was found that husband was keeping Guddi and used to harass the deceased. The husband Udayraj, Vikram, Guddi, Siyabai, Chandan Singh used to harass the deceased in connection with demand of motorcycle. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated. She has not committed any offence. In the dying declaration recoded by the executive Magistrate, no specific allegation has been made against the applicant. In another dying declaration recorded by ASI, the deceased has not implicated the applicant. It is further submitted that marriage of the deceased was solemnized about 10-12 years ago she has not made any demand of dowry and harassment. 5. The applicant is a woman and is in custody for more than four months. Trial will take some time. Therefore, the applicant be released on bail. 6. The prayer is opposed by learned Panel Lawyer as well as by the counsel appearing for the complainant. Case diary perused. From the postmortem report it appears that deceased died to cardio respiratory failure as a result of burn. From the dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate it appears that the deceased, on a question how she burnt, has clearly stated that mother-in-law, father-in-law, husband and Vikram set her on fire. The second dying declaration has been recorded by the ASI. In this dying declaration deceased has stated that she has been set on fire by Udayraj, Guddi and Vikram. Guddibai poured kerosene, Vikram caught hold of her and Udayraj has set her on fire. Smt.Munni mother of the deceased and Rambir father of the deceased, have stated that after marriage their daughter told that her husband, mother-in-law Siyabai and father-in-law Chandan Singh used to beat her in connection with demand of motorcycle and cash of Rs. 50,000/-. Guddibai poured kerosene, Vikram caught hold of her and Udayraj has set her on fire. Smt.Munni mother of the deceased and Rambir father of the deceased, have stated that after marriage their daughter told that her husband, mother-in-law Siyabai and father-in-law Chandan Singh used to beat her in connection with demand of motorcycle and cash of Rs. 50,000/-. Considering that the dying declaration, which was recorded on 2.8.2014 by the Executive Magistrate after receipt of certificate from the Doctor, it has clearly mentioned that applicant alongwith co-accused set her on fire, the applicant is not entitled for bail. Consequently, the application stands dismissed.