Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mamta Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 February, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 2014 of 2022
(MAMTA BAI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 23-02-2023
Shri V.S. Pal-Advocate for the appellant.
Shri A.K. Nirankari-Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on IA. No.1662 of 2023, which is third repeat application under
Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail
moved on behalf of appellant-Mamta Bai. Her first application (IA.5156/2022)
was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 10.05.2022 whereas second
application (IA.11536/2022) was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated
05.09.2022 with liberty to revive her prayer after two months.
Appellant-Mamta Bai stood convicted under Section 302 read with
Section 34 IPC on four counts and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life
with a fine of Rs.1,000/- in each count, convicted under Section 307 read with
Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of
Rs.1,000 and convicted under Section 436 read with Section 34 IPC and
sentenced to undergo RI for five years with a fine of Rs.1,000/- with default
stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
29.01.2022 passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri (M.P.) in
Sessions Trial No.01/2017.
As per prosecution story, deceased Laxmi was married to Ramlakhan
Rathore S/o Keshav Rathore about two years prior to the date of incident. An
FIR was lodged at about 06:15 pm on 16.04.2015 by complainant Rameshwar
Rathore with allegations that his sister deceased Laxmi married to Ramlakhan
Rathore suffered humiliation and embarrassment at the hands of main accused
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 2/24/2023
1:09:01 PM
Ramveer, elder brother of her husband who always had an ill-intention against
the deceased. When the complainant was sleeping with wife on the previous
night in the adjacent room his sister Laxmi, brother Mahesh, father Jagdish,
mother Geeta, younger sister Saraswati were fast asleep. He heard the shouting
of main accused Ramveer at about 02:30 am. He had a complaint that Laxmi,
daughter in law, for no reason or rhyme, was not being sent back to the in-laws
house. Enraged with such reason, a peculiar hostility was developed. It is
further alleged that the accused persons including the appellant and co-accused
Ramveer Rathore sprinkled petrol from the window of the room where the
aforesaid family members of the complainant were fast asleep and set them
ablaze. On raising alarm and hearing screams of persons so burnt, neighbours
Virendra Raghuvanshi, Pappu Prajapati and Vishnu Bhatt came at the spot.
They managed to extinguish fire but his parents, brother and sisters had
suffered serious burn injuries on account of misdeed of co-accused Ramveer.
All the four persons, namely, Laxmi, Mahesh, Geeta and Saraswati died
homicidal death. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, the FIR was registered.
Upon collection of material from the spot and recording of statements of
witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., challan was filed before CJM,
Shivpuri wherefrom the case was committed to the Sessions Court for trial.
The Sessions Court, upon critical evaluation of the evidence available on record
and recording of statements, convicted and sentenced the present appellant
along with other co-accused persons, as referred above.
Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment submits that the trial court did not appreciate the allegations made
against the accused persons in proper perspective. They were omnibus in
Signature Not Verified
nature. There is no overt act much less specific act attributed to any of the
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 2/24/2023
1:09:01 PM
accused persons, as alleged. The incident is alleged to be that of 02:30 am of
intervening night of 15.04.2015 and 16.04.2015 and alleged complicity of the
appellant and one Durgesh Rathore w/o Pappu @ Bhawani Shankar has been
shown whereas their names did not appear in the FIR. Appellant is innocent and
has no criminal antecedents. She has suffered incarceration from the date of
judgment i.e. 29.01.2022, however, during trial she was on anticipatory bail.
There is no-one at home to look after her four children as her husband i.e. the
main accused Ramveer Rathore is undergoing sentence. The appeal is of the
year 2022 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of this appeal in the near
future. Hence, learned counsel for the appellant prays for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail on behalf of appellant.
Per contra, Shri Nirankari, learned Public Prosecutor, while supporting
the judgment impugned, submits that prosecution has successfully proved the
complicity of the appellant in the alleged crime. The main accused Ramveer
Rathore along with other members of the family virtually invaded the house of
the deceased where after pouring petrol the entire room was set at ablaze. All
the four persons died of burn injuries, therefore it is a heinous crime. Dying
declarations of the deceased have also named the appellant. Therefore,
complicity of the appellant cannot be ruled out while taking into consideration
the matter on suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting on rival contentions touching merits of the case, but regard
being had to the fact that appellant is a lady with no criminal antecedents; she
has suffered incarceration of about 13 months though was on anticipatory bail
during trial; indeed it's a heinous crime where four innocent persons were set at
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 2/24/2023
1:09:01 PM
ablaze but looking to the fact that there is no-one to look after the children at
home since her husband i.e. main accused Ramveer Rathore has been
undergoing sentence, in the fitness of things, we consider it appropriate to
extend the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the present
appellant.
Accordingly, it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant-Mamta Bai
shall remain suspended during pendency of present appeal and she shall be
released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lacs only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court. Appellant-Mamta Bai is directed to appear
before the Registry of this Court first on 10th April, 2023 and on other
subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf with following further
conditions:-
(i) Appellant-Mamta Bai will abide by the terms and conditions of
various circulars and orders issued by the Government of India and the
State Government as well as the local administration from to time in the
matter of maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene, etc.,
to avoid proliferation of Novel Corona virus (COVID-19);
(ii) The concerned Jail Authorities are directed that before releasing
Appellant-Mamta Bai, her medical examination be conducted through the
jail doctor and if it is prima facie found that she is having any symptom of
COVID-19 then the consequential follow up action including the
isolation/quarantine or any further test required be undertaken immediately;
(iii) On violation of the conditions, State is free to apply for
cancellation of bail.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 2/24/2023
1:09:01 PM
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of disposal of
the instant application for suspension of sentence and shall have no bearing on
the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
pd
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 2/24/2023
1:09:01 PM
