Ranit Uranw v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1384 of 2019 • Ranit Uranw S/o Jagsay Uranw Aged About 20 Years R/o Sethinagar Ward No. 14, Shivrinarayan, Police Station - Shivrinarayan District - Janjgir Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Shivrinarayan District - Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent _______________________________________________________________ For Applicant : Shri Pawan Kesharwani, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Shri Sushil Sahu, P.L.

__________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 15/11 /2019

1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 339/2018 registered at Police Station Shivrinarayan, District - JanjgirChampa, (C.G.). for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.

2. In the present case, name of the complainant is Ganesh Prasad, who is the husband of deceased Pramila Aditya. On 23.04.2019, deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. On 24.04.2019 Ganesh made a report alleging therein that before marriage deceased Pramila had love affairs with the present applicant and due to that both applicant and Pramila used to talk with each other though phone. When deceased stopped talking to the applicant then on 23.04.2019 applicant went to the house of the deceased and assaulted her as to why she is not taking to him. Thereafter, deceased Pramila committed suicide by hanging herself. On the basis of the said, offence has been registered.

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that prima facie, no offence under Section 306 of IPC is made out against present Applicant. Also, no material is available on record on the basis of which it can be said that present applicant has instigated the deceased in any manner to commit suicide. Therefore, it is prayed that present applicant may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application.

5. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available with due care.

6. Taking into consideration the submissions put-forth on behalf of the parties, further considering the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence collected by the prosecution, without further commenting on other merits of the case, I am inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present Applicant.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

8. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Presiding Officer of the concerned trial Court. He shall also abide by all the following terms and conditions : (i) He 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 from disclosing such fact to the Court, (ii) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and

every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Prakash