Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 24 (CHH)

Pramod Nahar v. State of Chhattisgarh

2015-01-21

SANJAY K.AGRAWAL

body2015
ORDER Sanjay K. Agrawal, J. 1. Since the above mentioned two bail applications arise out of a common Crime No. 417/2014, therefore, they are heard analogously and decided by this common order. By way of the instant applications under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 417/2014 registered at Police Station Sector-6, Bhilai Nagar, District Durg for offence punishable under Sections 498-A read with Section 34, 354, 294 and 506 of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that marriage of Prachi was solemnized with Prasuk Nahar on 29-05-2013. It is further case of the prosecution that immediately after marriage, all the applicants started treating Prachi with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry and not only demanded Rs. 10 lacs, but also assaulted her, as a result, her ear-drum was damaged, Prateek Nahar, Prachi's husband's elder brother outraged her modesty on 16-03-2014 and thereby committed the aforesaid offence. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that the allegations against the present applicants are not only false but also fabricated. The injury on her ear was caused, as she fell down in the bath room. She peacefully took her all ornaments in presence of five panchas on 17-03-2014. Husband-Prasuk has filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights on 21-03-2014 and all the allegations made against them are false and vague, therefore, the present applicants may be released on anticipatory bail. 4. On the ether hand, Mr. Arvind Duhey, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State opposing the application for anticipatory bail, would submit that husband of Smt. Prachi (Objector) assaulted her on 08-01-2014 with the assistance of other co-accused persons, as a result thereof, her eardrum got burst and on 16-03-2014, her husband's brother outraged her modesty in presence of other members, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. Mr. Anand Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the objector also opposed the bail application. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, the assault made by Prasuk Nahar (husband) in connection with demand of dowry, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to applicant No. 2-Prasuk Nahar. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, the assault made by Prasuk Nahar (husband) in connection with demand of dowry, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to applicant No. 2-Prasuk Nahar. Likewise, Prateek Nahar, brother of husband of Prachi is also said to have outraged her modesty on 16-03-2014, looking to the involvement of the applicants in M.Cr.C. (A) No. 1086/2014, they are not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the bail application with regard to the applicants in M.Cr.C. (A) No. 1086/2014 is dismissed. 8. So far as applicants in M.Cr.C. (A) No. 1074/2014 are concerned, there are general and omnibus allegations against the applicants, namely Pramod Nahar, Smt. Shashi Nahar and Smt. Seema Nahar who are father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of Prachi and nothing has been brought on record to show that they will flee from justice, if they are granted anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application M.Cr.C. (A) No. 1074/2014, in so far as it relates to the applicants, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants Pramod Nahar, Smt. Shashi Nahar and Smt. Seema Nahar shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer arresting them and they shall abide by all the following terms and conditions:-- (i) that the accused/applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation before the concerned Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the accused/applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that the accused/applicants shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the accused/applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.