Dharmendra Kumar Ram v. State Of Chhattisgarh
-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 741 of 2018 • Dharmendra Kumar Ram S/o Late Shri Bholaram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o- Narmada Railway Colony, Quarter No. 23/A, Pendraroad, DistrictBilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Gourela, DistrictBilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant For Applicant - Shri Ashok Soni, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State - Shri Rahul Tamaskar, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 21-08-2018 1.
Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.119/2018, registered at Police Station -Gourela, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh for offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC, the applicant has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail.
2.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. A totally false allegation has been made about demand of dowry made by this applicant, whereas, the applicant and the complainant had performed court marriage, in which question of demand of dowry does not arise. Because of simple and petty quarrel between the husband and the wife, the complainant has lodged the false FIR. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant may be benefited with grant of anticipatory bail. 3.
Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application. 4.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5.
Marriage of applicant and complainant Ranjeeta Singh was performed in court on 24-05-2017. After passing of about one year on 02-04-2018 and subsequently on 26-04-2018 the quarrel took place between the husband and the wife, regarding which complaints were filed in the P.S., finally the FIR was
-2lodged on 02-05-2018. On medical examination injuries were found on the body of the complainant. Hence, this case.
6.
There appears to be dispute between the applicant and the complainant in this case, but looking to this fact that the applicant and the complainant had performed court marriage, hence allegation of demand of dowry needs further investigation. Hence, after due consideration on all the material present in the case diary, I feel inclined to grant anticipatory bail to this applicant. 7.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, he shall be released on bail by the officer arresting him on executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :
(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant 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 the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 8.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Aadil