High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/9370/2018allowed

Sarita Keshari v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-12-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 9370 of 2018 • Sarita Keshri, W/o Shri Suresh Keshri, aged about 60 years, Resident of Infront of Pendra Police Station, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Pendra, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent __________________________________________________________________ For Applicant : Shri U.K.S. Chandel, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Smt. M. Asha, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 14/12/2018

1. The Applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail as she is arrested in connection with crime No. 152/2010, registered at Police Station - Pendra, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 304 -B/34 of the IPC.

2. As per the prosecution story, the marriage of the deceased Divya Keshari was solemnized with Sumit Keshari in the year 2007. After the marriage, the in-laws of the deceased started demand of dowry in which the father of the deceased gave some amount to them, again the in-laws were demanding for more dowry and gave physical and mental pressure to the deceased. Due to this, she committed suicide by hanging herself on 09.07.2010. On the basis of the above allegations, offence has been registered against the present Applicant. The Applicant has been taken into custody on 09.10.2018.

3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submits that the

Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further states that the Applicant is an old lady aged about 60 years and is suffering from old age deceases. He also submits that there is no specific allegation against the present Applicant and there is common allegation against the present Applicant. He further submits that the Applicant is in custody since 09.10.2018 and trial will take time. Therefore, she may be enlarged on bail.

4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence collected by the prosecution and further considering the fact that the Applicant is in custody since 09.10.2018 and trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release her on bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

8. It is directed that the Applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for her appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Prakash