Indresh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3379 MP

 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

                    CR. A. No. 8683 / 2019
                   INDRESH Vs. STATE OF MP
                                                        --- 1 ---
INDORE, Dated : 16/07/2021
     Heard through video conferencing.
     Ms. Sangeeta Parsai, learned counsel for the appellant.
     Mr. Jayesh Vyas, learned PL for the respondent - State.

Heard on I.A.No. 7516/2020, an application filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by appellant Indresh for grant of bail and suspension of execution of jail sentence.

The appellant has been convicted u/S. 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with fine Rs.10,000/-, with default stipulation, by judgment dated 24/9/2018 passed by learned IVth Addl. Sessions Judge, Ratlam in S.T.No.95/2018.

As per the case of the prosecution on 17/4/2018 police received information about commission of suicide by Aarti in the house of Nandlal Bairagi (PW-2), situated at Sudama Parisar, Ratlam. During investigation it was revealed that the deceased performed love marriage with the present applicant in July 2016. She has committed suicide within 2 years of her marriage.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is an innocent and he has been implicated falsely in the offence. There is no legal evidence to connect him with the aforesaid offence. There are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the witnesses and on that count the judgment is not sustainable. FIR has been lodged HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

CR. A. No. 8683 / 2019 INDRESH Vs. STATE OF MP

--- 2 ---

belatedly ie., 7 days later, therefore, possibility of conspiring against the applicant is not ruled out. Learned counsel for the appellant prays for bail and suspension of execution of jail sentence.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent - State opposed the bail application and supported the impugned judgment and prayed for rejection of the bail application.

On perusal of the impugned judgment and the evidence available on record, it appears that death of the deceased occurred within 2 years of her marriage with the present appellant. Jyoti (PW 1); Nandlal (PW 2); Anusuiya (PW 3); Rajeshwari (PW 4) and Satyanarayan (PW 5), all material witnesses, have supported the prosecution story.

In view of the overwhelming evidence coupled with the medical evidence, in the considered opinion of this Court, no case is made out for grant of bail and suspension of execution of jail sentence.

Accordingly, I.A.No. 7516/2020 is rejected. Certified copy, as per Rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE KR

Digitally signed by KAMAL RATHORE Date: 2021.07.16 13:00:31 +05'30'