← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/9804/2018rejected

Deenaram Pal And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-01-17Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 9804 of 2018

1. Deenaram Pal S/o Late Jagdish Pal Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Kathiya No. 1, P. S. Kharora (Wrongly Mentioned As Khararo), District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Angeshwar Pal S/o Deenaram Pal Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Kathiya No. 1, P. S. Kharora (Wrongly Mentioned As Khararo), District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicants

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P. S. Kharora, Civil And Revenue District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For the Applicant :

Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, Advocate For the State :

Shri V. Tekam, Panel Lawyer ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board /01/2019

1. This is the first bail application under Section 439 of the CrPC and there is no bail application is pending before any other Court.

2. Perused the case diary provided by the learned counsel for the State in connection with the Crime No.332/2018 registered at Police Station Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC.

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that deceased Yamini Pal was the resident of village Kharora. Applicant No. 1 Deenaram Pal her father-inlaw and applicant No. 2 Angeshwar Pal is her husband. The marriage of the deceased was solemnized with applicant No. 2 on 05/03/2018. After the marriage applicants were harassing her on account of not bringing fridge and insufficient dowry. On 20/07/2018 deceased committed suicide by hanging.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that they have innocent and falsely implicated in the present case, therefore, they shall be released on bail.

5. On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application. He

further submits that no criminal antecedents against the them.

6. Counsel for the applicants further submitted that at the time of alleged incident applicants were not present in the house. Applicant No. 1 Deenaram Pal had given the intimation to the police officials.

7. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the seriousness of the alleged offence, looking to the impact of granting bail to the applicant on society, the present bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) Judge Kamde