Ku. Priyanka Bhatnagar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1457 of 2018 • Ku. Priyanka Bhatnagar D/o Shri Parmatma Bhatnagar, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Sattipara, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- Mahila Police Thana, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant For Applicant - Shri N.K. Mehta, Advocate.

For Non-applicant/State - Shri Anant Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 22-11-2018 1.

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.10/2018, registered at Police Station - Mahila Police Thana, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh for offence punishable under Section 498-A/34 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. No case is made out against this applicant. Similarly placed co-accused persons have been benefited with grant of anticipatory bail as well as regular bail. Hence, it is prayed that the application may be allowed.

3.

Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application submitting that there is evidence present in the case diary which show that this applicant was engaged in torturing the complainant for demand of dowry and for causing miscarriage and abortion. Hence, she is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5.

Complainant Sonali Bhatnagar was married to co-accused Mohit

-2Swaroop Bhatnagar on 28-04-2017. It is alleged that subsequent to her marriage, her husband and in-laws including this applicant subjected the complainant to torture and cruel treatment for demand of dowry, because of which, the complainant was compelled to leave her matrimonial home and then she has lodged the FIR.

6.

After considering on all the material present in the case diary and also keeping in view this fact that co-accused persons have been benefited with grant of regular bail and anticipatory bail, I feel inclined to allow this application. 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, she shall be released on bail by the officer arresting her 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 herself 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 her by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Aadil