Mridula Ramtake v. State Of Chhattisgarh
Page No.1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2000 of 2018 • Mridula Ramteke, aged about 31 years, D/o Shri C.L. Ramteke, Occupation- Service, Working as Junior Technical Assistant, Civil Supplies Corporation, Khairagarh, Originally R/o Jagdalpur, Outpost Dharampura, Police Station Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police StationBhqatapara (City), District- Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, (Chhattisgarh). ---- Non-applicant.
_____________________________________________________________ For Applicant :
Mr. Ranbir Singh Marhas, Advocate.
For Objector :
:
Mr. Vijay Bhadur Singh, Advocate.
For Respondent/State :
Mr. Ashok Swarnkar, Panel Lawyer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order On Board 01/05/2018
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 53/2018, registered at Police Station- Bhatapara (City), District- Baloda-Bazar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 306 of Indian Penal Code of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant is in jail since 18.02.2018. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. According to the case of prosecution, no case is made out against her. Infact, the applicant is a public servant working as Junior
Page No.2 Technical Assistant, Civil Supplies Corporation, Khairagarh, had acquaintance with the deceased- Harish Sharma since 2012. She had entrusted some jewelry and cash with the deceased and on the day before the fateful day, she had demanded her jewelry and cash from the deceased, because of which some quarrel had taken place between them. All the allegations made in this case against this applicant are totally false. Charge-sheet has been filed after completion of the investigation, hence, it is prayed that applicant be enlarged on regular bail.
3. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submitted that the allegation made against applicant by the witnesses in this case, alleging that she was the person who used to blackmail the deceased on number of occasions, because of which he was compelled to commit suicide, hence no case is made out for grant of regular bail to the applicant.
4. Counsel for the objector submits that looking to the statement given by mother, sister and brother of the deceased that this applicant had continuously harassed the deceased for about one year period and blackmailed him, because of which the deceased had paid about Rs. 11 Lakhs to the applicant and subsequent to that, she was also pressuring the deceased for transferring his flat in the name of the applicant, hence, the applicant should not be granted regular bail.
5. Heard both the parties and perused the case diary.
6. According to prosecution case, on 15.02.2018 in the morning the deceased- Harish Sharma consumed some poisonous substance whereupon, he was taken to tshe hospital for treatment. A dying declaration was recorded by SHO Bhatapara in which he was stated
Page No.3 that he has taken this step because of the harassment given by this applicant because the applicant had threatened him that she will initiate some legal proceeding against him. The deceased died on the same day. A suicide note has also been seized in the investigation, which shows the mentality of the applicant for committing suicide but in that suicide note, no allegation is made against this applicant. Apart from that, some of the witnesses have stated that it was this applicant who has entrusted her jewelery and some other article with the deceased and had demanded them back, which was the reason the dispute arose between them. Hence, this case.
7. Considering the entire material present in the case diary, and looking to the evidence on record against the applicant, I am of this view that the applicant should be granted regular bail.
8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for her appearance as and when directed.
Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Amita