Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vikas Ambh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 April, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No. 21143/2022
(VIKAS AMBH Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Gwalior, Dated : 28/04/2022
Shri Pallav Tripathi, Counsel for applicant.
Shri P.P.S. Vajeeta, Counsel for State.
Case diary is available.
This first application under Section 438 of CrPC has been filed
for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime
No.117/2022 registered at Police Station- Hazira, District Gwalior,
for offence punishable under Sections 306, 34 of IPC.
It is submitted by Counsel for applicant that the applicant is the
person against whom it is alleged that he was on talking terms with the
wife of deceased. The deceased had left a suicide note in which he has
mentioned that on 17.02.2022, his wife was trying to commit suicide
by jumping in front of a running train and when he called her near
relatives, then nobody came there. Thereafter, he went along-with
police personnel and when she was talking nonsense, she was beaten
by him on which an FIR was lodged by the police. Earlier also, the
daughter of applicant had lodged a false criminal case under Section
498 of IPC against the deceased and his family members. She was in
habit of talking to unknown persons. He also admitted that he had
beaten her but she did not improve her conduct. Whenever a
complaint was made to her family members, then every time they
replied that wife of the deceased has died for them but still they were
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No. 21143/2022
(VIKAS AMBH Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
continue to help her out. Now, he is upset with all the incidents and he
is not in a position to bear the pressure anymore. It is further
submitted that there is no allegation that applicant had ever maltreated
or misbehaved the deceased on the question of talking with his wife.
On the contrary, in the suicide note, it is mentioned that the applicant
was insisting that the deceased should keep his wife with him. It is
submitted that even if entire allegations are accepted, then it is clear
that no offence under Section 306 of IPC would be made out. The
applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation.
There is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with
prosecution case.
Per Contra, the application is opposed by the State Counsel as
well as Counsel for complainant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without
commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed
subject to condition that if the applicant appears before the
Investigating Officer (Arresting Officer) on or before 06.05.2022, he
shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum
of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (Investigating
Officer).
The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by
the Investigating Officer as and when required. He shall further abide
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No. 21143/2022
(VIKAS AMBH Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438
of Cr. P. C.
It is made clear that in case if the applicant fails to appear
before the Investigating Officer (Arresting Authority) on or before
06.05.2022, then this order shall lose its effect and the Investigating
Officer shall be at liberty to take him in custody.
In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the
case of Aparna Bhat & Ors. vs. State of M.P. passed on 18/3/2021
in Criminal Appeal No.329/2021, the intimation regarding grant of
bail be sent to the complainant.
CC as per rules.
(G.S. Ahluwalia)
Judge
Abhi
ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
2022.04.30
18:59:08 +05'30'
