Muraisha Khatun & ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 206 of 2020

1. Muraisha Khatun W/o Shri Mohammad Halim Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village And Post Durganagar Birgaon, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Mohammad Sahzad S/o Shri Mohammad Halim Aged About 18 Years, R/o Village And Post Durganagar Birgaon, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Mohammad Saddam S/o Shri Mohammad Halim Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village And Post Durganagar Birgaon, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh, Through : Police Station Urla, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Applicants :

Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, on behalf of Mr. Arun Kochar Adv.

For Respondent/State :

Ms. Reena Singh, PL.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 24/02/2020

1. The accused/applicants have moved this first bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 579/2019 registered at Police Station-Urla, District-Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 506B, 323, 34 and 376 of the IPC.

2. The prosecution story, in brief is that, complainant got married to accused Mohamad Saddam on 31.10.2019 with social customs. It is alleged that the present applicants tortured her physically as well as mentally for demand of dowry and demanded Rs. 5 lakhs. On 19.11.2019 at about 11:00 pm., complainant's father-in-law forcefully committed sexual intercourse with her and threatened her if she

disclosed to anyone he will kill her. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicants.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the main allegation is against the father-in-law of the complainant and the applicants are in jail since 16.12.2019, there is no likelihood of their case being decided in near future, therefore, the present applicants may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of applicants and further considering the facts that the main allegation is against the father-in-law of the complainant and the applicants are in jail since 16.12.2019 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

7. Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each, with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge H.L. Sahu