Allowed

Indraveer Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Sept 2023MCRCA/700/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicant faced charges under Section 498-A IPC for domestic cruelty and dowry demand. Considering omnibus allegations, prior bail history, and agreement resolution attempts, the court granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; arrestee to be released on personal bond sum Rs.50,000/- subject to specified conditions including availability for interrogation and no inducement.

Indraveer Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.Cr.C.(A) No. 700 of 2023

¶5

Indraveer Singh, aged about 31 years, S/o Raghuveer Singh, R/o – F-112, Income Tax Colony, C-21/22 C.B.D. ('Se' – wrongly mention instead of 'C' in the cause title of the impugned order) Belapur, Navi Mumbai, M.H.

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House Officer – Mahila Thana, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

		---- Respondent/Non-Applicant
For Applicant	:	Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate
For Non-Applicant/State	:	Mr. Ashish Gupta, Panel Lawyer
For Complainant	:	Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Advocate alongwith complainant

¶10

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶11

05.09.2023

¶12

The instant is the first application for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. He is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 58/2023 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for an offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶13

As per the prosecution story, the marriage between the applicant and complainant Smt. Gurvinder Kaur was solemnized on 13.07.2021. A written complaint was made by the complainant against the applicant and his relatives and thereafter on 18.04.2023 the F.I.R. was registered on the allegations that the applicant and his relatives have subjected her to cruelty and demanded dowry. On such complainant, the police registered the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of IPC against the applicant and his relatives.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there are four accused persons including the applicant. He would submit that all other co-accused persons have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the court below.

¶15

¶16

He would further submit that there are omnibus allegations against the applicant and his family members and there is no need of custodial interrogation. He would also submit that a meeting was held by Guru-Singh Sahab Gurudwara Committee and the complainant herself has left her matrimonial house as she did not want to stay alongwith the parents of the applicant, therefore, he would pray for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶17

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant would oppose the bail application. They would submit the complainant was subjected to cruelty and the demand of dowry was made. They would further submit that prima facie material is available against the applicant, therefore, the application deserves to be dismissed.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

¶19

Vide order dated 05.06.2023 ad-interim bail was granted to the applicant on the ground that before Guru-Singh Sahab Gurudwara Committee on 01.05.2023 the parties agreed to resolve their disputes but even thereafter complainant lodged a false and concocted report against the applicant.

¶20

Taking into consideration that there are general and omnibus allegations against the applicant and other co-accused persons, the other co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail by the court below and earlier ad-interim bail was granted to the applicant, I am inclined to extend the benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to the present applicant. Accordingly, the application is allowed

¶21

It is directed that in the event of the arrest of the applicant in connection with the crime in question, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions:-

¶22

i. He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,

¶23

¶24

threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court or Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

¶25

ii. He shall not act in any manner that will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial, and

¶26

iii. He shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶27

iv. He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in the future.

¶28

The observations made in the course of this order are only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for grant of anticipatory bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any of the observations made hereinabove.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶31

vatti

Indraveer Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indraveer Singh 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

Budhen Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Djoe Isac Thomas Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Madhusudan Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar Chandra Vs Smt. Sumitra Chandra

Mansoor Hussain Alvi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nimish Sunil Agarwal Vs State of Chhattisgarh