Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sonu Gothwal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 June, 2022
Author: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 27th OF JUNE, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 27697 of 2022
Between:-
1. SONU GOTHWAL W/O LATE RAJESH GOTHWAL ,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
NOTHING
R/O: 72, CHETANPURA, NAGDA, DISTRICT
UJJAIN.
At Present R/o: 559, PANCHAM KE PHEL, THANA
TUKOGANJ, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DIPTI W/O KADAM LODWAL , AGED ABOUT 38
YEARS, OCCUPATION: NIL
R/O: 72, CHETANPURA, NAGDA, DISTRICT
UJJAIN.
At Present R/O: 559, PANCHAM KE PHEL, THANA
TUKOGANJ, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. KADAM S/O SHRI KANHAIYALAL LODWAL ,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
MURTIKAR
R/O: 72, CHETANPURA, NAGDA, DISTRICT
UJJAIN.
At Present R/O: 559, PANCHAM KE PHEL, THANA
TUKOGANJ, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANTS
(BY SHRI ASHISH KANUNGO ADV.)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
KSHIPRA, DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....NON APPLICANT
(SHRI VIRAJ GODHA, PL FOR STATE)
Signature Not Verified
(SHRI RAMESH CHANDRA NIHORE ADV. FOR OBJECTOR)
SAN
This application coming on for orders this day, th e court passed the
Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH
SAVNER
Date: 2022.06.27 19:10:53 IST
following:
2
ORDER
This is the first anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicants are apprehending their arrest
in connection with Crime No.277/2022 registered at P.S. - Kshipra, District
Indore (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.
As per the prosecution story, marriage of the applicant No.1 Sonu was
solemnized with deceased Rajesh on 19.11.2019. Applicant No.3 is the brother-
in-law of the deceased and applicant No.2 is wife of the applicant No.3. It is
alleged that after the marriage deceased was mentally and physically harassed by
the applicants, due to which he committed suicide by sinking in river. Deceased
has left a suicide note behind him. It has been described in the suicide note that
all the applicants are responsible for his suicide. Accordingly offence under
Section 306 of IPC has been registered against the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants contended that the applicants are
innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this matter. Applicant No.1 is
widow of the deceased and she was mentally and physically harassed by her
husband and other family members, because of that she has given a written
complaint at P.S. Lasudiya. She has also filed a complaint under Domestic
Violence Act and also filed an application for maintenance before the Family
Court. The applicants never harassed the deceased. After 10.6.2021 applicant
No.1 was not living with the deceased. Earlier during the Merg enquiry no
offence has been registered against the applicants. They are permanent resident
of Nagda, District Ujjain. Hence he prays that all the applicants be released on
anticipatory bail in case they are arrested in the aforesaid offence. In support of
Signature Not Verified
SAN
his contention he has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in
Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH
SAVNER
Date: 2022.06.27 19:10:53 IST
the case of Sanju Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2002(5) SCC 371.
Per contra, learned counsel for the objector opposed the anticipatory bail
application and prayed for its rejection by submitting that all the applicants are
responsible for the unfortunate suicide of the deceased. They continuously
harassed the deceased and spoiled his life.
Learned PL for respondent/State also opposed the anticipatory bail
application and prayed for its rejection.
Perused the case diary as well as the impugned order of the court below.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments
advanced by both the parties, nature and gravity of allegation and also taking
note of the fact that applicant No.1 is widow of the deceased, she has filed a
complaint under the Domestic Violence Act as well as an application for
maintenance and some other legal proceedings against the deceased, it appears
that her relationship with the deceased was very tensed. Therefore, in view of
the evidence available on record, without commenting upon merits of the case,
at this stage applicant No.1 does not deserve for anticipatory bail.
Therefore, anticipatory bail application of applicant No.1 Sonu is
rejected.
So far as applicants No.2 and 3 are concerned, they are brother-in-law
and wife of brother-in-law of the deceased and they did not made any complaint
or lodge any legal proceedings against the deceased. Therefore, in view of the
evidence available on record, without commenting upon merits of the case, I
deem it proper to release the applicants No.2 & 3 on anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, this application is partly allowed. It is directed that in the
Signature Not Verified
event of applicant’s arrest, the applicant No.2 Dipti and applicant No.3
SAN
Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH
Kadam be released on anticipatory bail upon their furnishing a personal bond in
SAVNER
Date: 2022.06.27 19:10:53 IST
the sum of Rs.75,000/- each with one solvent surety each in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the arresting officer. The applicants No.2 & 3 are further
directed to appear before the investigating officer within a period of 2 weeks
from today and they shall assist in the investigation process on all the dates, as
may be fixed by the Investigating Officer from time to time. They shall abide by
the conditions enumerated u/S. 438(2) of Cr.P.C.
With the aforesaid, the application stands disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
trilok
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH
SAVNER
Date: 2022.06.27 19:10:53 IST
