Ankit Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3652 MP

         01          HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                        MCRC No. 35513/2021
                      (Ankit Sharma vs. State of M.P.)

Gwalior, Dated: 27/7/2021
      Heard through video conferencing.

      Shri A.R. Shivhare, learned counsel for the applicant.

      Shri Ravindra Singh Kushwah, learned Dy. Advocate General

for the respondent-State.

This is first application under Section 438 of CrPC for grant of

anticipatory bail.

The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime

No.360/2021 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Shivpuri for

offence under Sections 306 and 506 of IPC.

It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant Ankit Sharma

that the applicant has been falsely implicated. He has not committed

any offence. In the present case, there is no ingredients of instigation

and there is no evidence against the present applicant to instigate the

deceased to commit suicide. It is further submitted that the applicant

and the deceased were friends and screenshots of chatting between the

deceased and the applicant have been filed along with the bail

application. As the family members of the deceased were not agreed to

marry the deceased with the present applicant, therefore, she

committed suicide. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the

applicant that as there is no ingredients of Section 107 of IPC in the

present case, therefore, no case under Sections 306 and 506 of IPC is 02 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No. 35513/2021 (Ankit Sharma vs. State of M.P.)

made out against the present applicant. In support of his submission,

learned counsel for the applicant relied upon various judgments passed

by this High Court in the cases of Shama Praveen Beg & Anr. vs.

State of M.P. & Anr., [2018 (2) JLJ 635], Manish Dubey vs. State of

M.P., [2018 (3) MPWN 226] and Devendra Singh vs. State of M.P.,

[2007 (3) MPWN 95] and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the

applicant.

Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of

the applicant and has submitted that the suicide note was recovered

from the possession of the deceased wherein it is specifically stated by

the deceased that she is committing suicide on account of instigation

made by the present applicant. It is further submitted that after

marriage of the deceased, the applicant was continuously threatening

the deceased along with her family members and was compelling her

to marry him, therefore, the deceased committed suicide. Hence,

prayed to reject the anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

In reply, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the

allegation made by the State counsel that the applicant was compelling

the deceased to marry him after her marriage is totally false. In fact,

the deceased was unmarried till her death. It is further submitted that

despite presence of suicide note, offence under Section 306 of IPC is 03 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No. 35513/2021 (Ankit Sharma vs. State of M.P.)

not made out against the applicant.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the

materials available on record.

In the present case, there is specific allegation of commission of

offence under Sections 306 and 506 of IPC against the present

applicant. The deceased has committed suicide and in the suicide note,

she has disclosed the facts which are against the present applicant.

Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of offence along with

facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant

benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, the application is

rejected.

  Digitally signed
  by ALOK KUMAR
  Date: 2021.07.27
  15:56:45 +05'30'                                     (Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava)
AKS                                                                 Judge