Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 4 (MP)

Kalibai v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2023-01-02

PRANAY VERMA

body2023
JUDGMENT Pranay Verma, J. - They are heard. Perused the challan papers. 2. This is the First application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as the applicants are implicated in connection with Crime No.387/2022 registered at Police Station Meghnagar, District Jhabua (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 120-B of the IPC. 3. The applicant is in custody since 08-10-2022. 4. As per the prosecution, on 13-08-2022 report was lodged by Nilesh Panchal to the effect that his brother Vijay had gone in the morning for work but has not come back till the evening. At about 07:00 pm information was received regarding a dead body near Hanuman Mandir, Navapada Road and the same was discovered to be that of Vijay. There were injury marks on his head. Thereafter, FIR was registered against unknown persons and investigation was commenced during the course of which it was discovered that the applicant was having illicit relationship with Vijay which was found out by her husband due to which she and her husband alongwith co-accused Sunil, Naresh and Kulu @ Kaliya entered into a conspiracy to kill him and eventually killed him. Recovery of a wooden Fanchra and shoes of deceased was made from Amarsingh. A bamboo stick was recovered from Kalu. On completion of the investigation the accused including the applicant has been implicated and arrested for the present offence. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. There is no evidence whatsoever available on record to connect the applicant with the present crime. Her implication is solely on the basis of memorandum of co-accused and her own memorandum recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. No recovery has been made from her and there is no eye witness to the incident. Even call records between the co-accused are absent. The allegations against the applicant are even otherwise only of conspiring with the other co-accused for killing the deceased and subsequently disposing of his body. The allegation of assault on the deceased by a weapon is on the other co-accused. There is no direct evidence against the applicant, who is not having any criminal antecedents. On such grounds prayer for grant of bail to the applicant has been made. 6. The allegation of assault on the deceased by a weapon is on the other co-accused. There is no direct evidence against the applicant, who is not having any criminal antecedents. On such grounds prayer for grant of bail to the applicant has been made. 6. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent/State submitting that in view of the allegations levelled against the applicant she is not entitled to be released on bail. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case diary. 8. The implication of the applicant appears to be primarily on the basis of memorandum of co-accused and her own memorandum recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. There is no direct material on record against the applicant. The allegation of assault on the deceased by a weapon is on the other co-accused. The applicant is alleged to have conspired for killing the deceased and disposing of his body regarding which there is no direct evidence. Thus in my opinion, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that she shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. 10. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective. Certified copy as per rules.