Allowed

Raja Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Mar 2022MCRCA/216/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a second anticipatory bail application filed by Raja Sharma and Rani Sharma apprehending arrest in a dowry death case. The Court granted bail due to their residence being distant from the crime scene and lack of evidence linking them to the deceased's death.

What did the court decide?

Second anticipatory bail application allowed with direction to release applicants on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000 each with one surety.

Raja Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Domestic Violence | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRCA No. 216 of 2022

¶5

Raja Sharma S/o Lakhanlal Sharma, (Raja Mahraj), Aged About 40 Years,

¶6

Rani Sharma (Pappy Sharma) W/o Raja Sharma, Aged About 35 Years,

¶7

Both are R/o Lohar Ward, Puran, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

---- Applicants

¶9

Versus

¶10

State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mahila Thana, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

---- Non-applicant

¶12

For Applicants : Mr. Roshan Dubey, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Govt. Advocate

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board

¶14

17.03.2022

¶15

The applicants have preferred this second bail application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, as they are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.128 of 2021, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), for offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of Indian Penal Code. First application was dismissed as withdrawn.

¶16

Case of prosecution in brief, is that, prosecutrix got married with one Avinash Tiwari on 15.06.2020. After marriage, deceased started living in the company of her husband at Kawardha. She died on 06.11.2021 in Mekahara Hospital, Raipur during course of her treatment. Mother of deceased lodged written report on 12.11.2021 making allegation of ill-treatment and harassment to

¶17

¶18

deceased for demand of dowry, based upon which, First Information Report was registered on 19.11.2021 against six persons including applicants.

¶19

Mr. Roshan Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants would submit that though in the complaint, relationship has been mentioned to be applicant No.2 to be sister-in-law and applicant No.1 to be husband of applicant No.2, but applicant No.2 is not real sister of Avinash Tiwari, but she is daughter of aunt of applicant. He also pointed out that deceased was residing along with husband at Kawardha, whereas applicants are resident of Mungeli, which is about 60 kms. away from Kawardha. He submits that in written statement, it has come that after marriage, there was dispute on trivial issues between husband and wife, upon which, both of them lodged report to concerned police station on 24.12.2020. Looking to the nature of complaint, complaints were forwarded to the Women Cell for counseling of the parties. In counseling proceedings, both the parties arrived at compromise and again started living happily. When deceased became pregnant, she suffered some medical ailment and her condition started deteriorating, for which, she took treatment in different hospitals at different point of time and during that period, she gave birth to a girl child. As per contents of complaint, deceased was continuously under medical treatment and during the course of her treatment in hospital, she died. It is not a case that she died unnatural death. The allegation of ill-treatment and

¶20

¶21

harassment against applicants are absolutely false and baseless. He submits that applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶22

Per contra, Mr. Gurudev I Sharan, Govt. Advocate for the State opposing the submissions of learned counsel for the applicants, would submit that specific allegations have been levelled against applicants with regard to ill-treatment and harassment of deceased on account of bringing less dowry and inferior articles from her parents house at the time of marriage. In the written report lodged by mother of deceased, allegations have been levelled against six persons including applicants, hence, they are not entitled for anticipatory bail. Out of six, three persons were arrested and their application for grant of regular bail is pending.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶24

Taking into consideration entire facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, undisputed fact as appearing in the complaint that deceased and her husband are residing at Kawardha, during stay of deceased along with her husband at Kawardha, she suffered with medical ailment during her pregnancy period, from which, she could not recovered even after taking treatment at different hospitals at Kawardha and Raipur, she died during the course of her treatment of medical ailment, as stated applicants are resident of Mungeli, 60 kms. away from Kawardha, I am inclined to release the present applicants on anticipatory bail.

¶25

¶26

Accordingly, second anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants in connection with the aforesaid offence, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and they shall be abide by the following conditions :-

¶27

(i) they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶28

(ii) they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶29

(iii) they shall not influence the witnesses during pendency of the trial.

¶30

Certified copy as per Rules.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶33

Yogesh

Raja Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Urmila Dhruw Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Raghavendra Kumar Rathore And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.

Samlal @ Shyamlal and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Ms. Kumudani Lata Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Nitin Singh Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Girja Devi and Others Vs Ashok Kumar and Others