Sukrita Bai v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8090 of 2019 • Sukrita Bai W/o Dharamlal Tandey Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Bhandora, Police Station - Bilaigarh, District - Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Bilaigarh, District - Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Applicant :

Mr. P. K. Patel, Adv.

For Respondent/State :

Mr. Wasim Miyan, PL.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 03/02/2020

1. The accused/applicant has moved this first bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for releasing her on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 182/2019 registered at Police Station-Bilaigarh, District - Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 304-B, 34 of the IPC.

2. The prosecution story, is that father of the deceased Brajlal Mahilange lodged a written report alleging in it that on 24.03.2019, his daughter Priyanka got married with Dinesh Tande according to Hindu Rituals. After some time of marriage, his daughter called him and told that her in-laws harassed and tortured her saying that she brought less dowry and tortured physically and mentally. On the date of incident, son-in-law called him that his daughter fell down and became unconscious then they took her in hospital. When the father of the deceased and her family member reached to the

hospital, they found that his daughter was no more. Day after tomorrow deceased's father-in-law told to deceased's father that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. Father of the deceased alleged that the in-laws of the deceased tortured her for dowry. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant and other co-accused.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the other co-accused (fatherin-law of the deceased) has already been granted bail in MCRC No. 6588/2019 so, the present applicant may also be granted benefit of bail. The applicant is in jail since 27.11.2019, there is no likelihood of his case being decided in near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail.

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

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

6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of applicant and further considering the facts that the other coaccused has already been granted bail. The applicant is in jail since 27.11.2019 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

7. Accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail on her executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. She is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge H.L. Sahu