← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRCA/674/2020allowed

Manish Sahu & ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-07-16Hon'Ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 674 of 2020 1.

Manish Sahu, aged about 32 years S/o Lt. Parasram Sahu, 2.

Smt. Ambika Sahu, aged about 50 years, W/o Lt. Parasram Sahu, 3.

Kumari Omeshwari Sahu, aged about 34 years, D/o Lt Parasram Sahu, All are R/o Village Kolar, Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station Mahila Thana, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

---- Respondent For Applicant :

Mr. Y.C. Sharma, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Judgment on Board 16/07/2020 1.

The matter is heard through video conferencing. 2.

The applicants have filed this application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail as they are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 18/2020 registered at police station- Mahila Thana, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 294 & 506-B of the IPC. 3.

Counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press this bail application on behalf of applicant No. 1 Manish Sahu. 4.

Accordingly, this bail application on behalf of applicant No. 1 Manish Sahu is dismissed.

5.

According to the case of the prosecution, applicant No. 2 Smt. Ambika

Sahu and applicant No. 3 Ku. Omeshwari Sahu are respective motherin-law and sister-in-law of the Complainant. The marriage between the Complainant and applicant No. 1 Manish Sahu was solemnized on 07/05/2019. On 25/02/2020, a report has been lodged by the Complainant alleging therein that after the marriage, the applicants used to torture her for demand of dowry. On the basis of said report, offence has been registered.

6.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant Nos. 2 & 3 submits that applicant Nos. 2 & 3 are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that virtually the Complainant after two months of marriage herself left the house and after few months, she made a false and fabricated report against the applicants. He further submits that there are general allegations against applicant Nos. 2 & 3. Both are ladies. The main allegations have been made against husband, therefore, he prays to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to applicant Nos. 2 & 3. 7.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the said application.

8.

I have heard counsel for the parties.

9.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the argument advanced by counsel for the parties, particularly considering that applicant Nos. 2 & 3 are ladies and the main allegation has been made against applicant No. 1 Manish Sahu, without further commenting on other merit of the case, I am inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to applicant Nos. 2 & 3.

10.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed with respect to

applicant No. 2 Smt. Ambika Sahu and applicant No. 3 Ku. Omeshwari Sahu.

11.

It is directed that in the event of arrest applicant Nos. 2 & 3, they shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer arresting them and they shall abide by all the following terms and conditions:

i.

That, applicant Nos. 2 & 3 shall make themselves available for interrogation before the concerned Investigating Officer as and when required;

ii.

That, applicant Nos. 2 & 3 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii.

That, applicant Nos. 2 & 3 shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and iv.

That, applicant Nos. 2 & 3 shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

12.

Certified copy, as per rules.

Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Rahul