Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 998 (MP)

Vinod Tomar v. State Of Madhya Pradesh

2020-10-05

RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

body2020
JUDGMENT Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J. - This is first bail application filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The applicant is in custody since 9.6.2020, in connection with Crime No.159/2020, registered at Police Station Mandideep, District Raisen (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 304- B/34 IPC. 3. As per prosecution story, on 22.3.2020, deceased Ritu poured kerosene and set herself on fire. Thereafter, she was admitted in the hospital and on 7.4.2020, she died. Marg was registered. It is found that accused/applicant was habitual in drinking liquor and used to play gambling. Deceased objected the same, due to this, accused/applicant tortured and humiliated her. Apart from this, accused/applicant and co-accused demanded Rs.1 Lakh as dowry, so she committed suicide. Thereafter, case has been registered against the present applicant for the aforesaid offence. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is in jail since 9.6.2020. The marriage of deceased-Ritu was solemnised with accused/applicant on 23.4.2015, they were blessed with two children and deceased was residing happily but due to some domestic dispute, she poured kerosene and set herself on fire. During the investigation, dying declaration of deceased was recorded by the Executive Magistrate. Her statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. was also recorded by the Investigating Officer. It is alleged by her that accused/applicant was habitual in drinking liquor and used to play gambling and after getting annoyed by the same, she committed suicide. Thereafter, statements of relatives of deceased have been recorded in which they alleged about some demand of dowry or cruelty by the accused/applicant, but deceased herself did not allege any fact about cruelty or demand of dowry or cruelty, so no case is made out against the present accused/applicant. Charge sheet has been filed. Accused/applicant is father of two children and he is bread earner of his family. It is the time of COVID-19, so further proceedings before the trial Court is withheld and trial will take long time in its final disposal. There is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The accused/ applicant ready to furnish bail as per the order, abiding with all conditions imposed by the Court. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application. 6. There is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The accused/ applicant ready to furnish bail as per the order, abiding with all conditions imposed by the Court. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application. 6. After hearing arguments of the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that during investigation dying declaration is recorded by the Executive Magistrate, deceased did not allege any fact about demand of dowry and cruelty against the applicant, she alleged only that accused/applicant is habitual in drinking liquor and used to play gambling, the applicant is in jail since 9.6.2020, charge sheet has been filed, it is the time COVID-19, so further proceedings in the trial Court is withheld and trial will take long time in its final disposal, accused/applicant is the father of two children and he is the bread earner of his family, there is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, it would be appropriate to release the applicant on bail, therefore without commenting on merits of the case, application of the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable. Consequently, it is hereby allowed. 7. It is directed that applicant-Vinod Tomar be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one surety of the same amount each to the satisfaction of the JMFC concerned or trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the applicant shall also comply the rules and norms of social distancing. 8. Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority :- 1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the applicant by the jail doctor before his release. 2 . The applicant shall not be released if he is suf ering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out. 3 . The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the applicant by the jail doctor before his release. 2 . The applicant shall not be released if he is suf ering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out. 3 . If it is found that the applicant is suf ering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility. 9. Certified copy as per rules.