Sarju Das Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 568 MP

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-11558-2021 (SARJU DAS PRAJAPATI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Gwalior, Dated : 09.03.2021

Shri Atul Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant.

Shri A.K. Nirankari, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

This is first bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant

for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested by Police Station Girwai,

District Gwalior (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.285/2020

registered in relation to the offence punishable u/S. 302 of IPC.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant

has falsely been implicated in the case and he has not committed any

offence in any manner. He is in custody since 10.12.2019. Investigation

is over and charge sheet has already been filed in the matter. It is argued

that an FIR was got registered on the basis of complaint made by Ketan

Prajapati who is son of the present applicant. It is submitted that the

complainant has initially deposed against the present applicant that

applicant has murdered his wife by pressing her neck, as a result of

which, she has expired, but subsequently, his statement was recorded

before the Court, wherein, he has not supported the prosecution story

and subsequently he was declared hostile in the matter. Other witness

Deepesh Parjapati who is also the son of the present applicant has also

turned hostile. Usha Parjapati, who is the sister of the present applicant

has also turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case. Amit

Sharma (PW-4) who is the friend of Ketan Parjapai has also turned

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-11558-2021 (SARJU DAS PRAJAPATI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

hostile who was gone to the police station to lodge the report along with

the complainant. It is submitted that there is no other incriminating

material against the present applicant except the fact that he is the

husband of the deceased and the incident has taken place at about 3:00

AM in the morning. He has relied upon the judgment passed by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Subramaniam Vs. State of Tamil

Nadu and Anr. reported in (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 1392 and also in the

case of Mula Devi and another Vs. State of Uttarakhand reported in

(2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 854. Both the case are dealing with Section 302 of

IPC and are similar to the present fact and circumstance of the case,

wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted the benefit to the

aforesaid appellants of the cases. In such circumstance, he prays for

grant of bail. He is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that

may be imposed by this Court while considering his application for

grant of bail.

Per contra, counsel for the State has opposed the bail application

stating that although the complainant was turned hostile before the

Court, but other evidences available against the present applicant and

the circumstances are required to be seen. He has drawn attention of this

Court to the statement of Naval Kishore Parjapati (PW/6) who happens

to be brother of the deceased and has categorically stated regarding the

harassment being caused to her sister by the present applicant. The death

has taken place at 3:00 AM in the morning on 07.12.2019 inside the

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-11558-2021 (SARJU DAS PRAJAPATI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

house of the present applicant. The cause of the death is reported to be

strangulation. It is not in dispute the fact that the applicant was in the

house, when the incident has taken place. In such circumstances, in the

back drop of the incriminating circumstances, the applicant is only

person who could have murdered the deceased. Even the principal

accused Kallu has not surrendered till date and not cooperated in the

investigation. He has prayed for dismissal of the application.

Considering overall facts and circumstances of the case and also

the fact that the applicant is husband of the deceased and looking to the

other incriminating circumstances, this Court does not deem it

appropriate to allow the present bail application. Accordingly, present

bail application is hereby dismissed.

However, as the main witnesses have been examined before the

trial Court, trial Court is directed to expedite the proceedings of the trial.

                                                    (Vishal Mishra)
LJ*/-                                                   Judge

            LOKENDRA JAIN
            2021.03.13
            12:40:20 -08'00'