Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mujeeb Ahmad Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 21 March, 2018

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C.No.10191/2018
(Mujib Ahmad Khan Vs. State of M.P.)
(1)

Gwalior, dated : 21.3.18
Shri Ravi Ballabh Tripathi, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Avneesh Singh, Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

Shri Atul Gupta, Advocate for the complainant.
Case Diary is perused.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.
I.A. No.2186/18, an application, under
section 301(2)
of the
Cr.P.C, is considered and allowed.

This is first application under
section 438
of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.

Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime
No.14/2018 registered at Police Station Karera, District Shivpuri, for the
offence punishable under sections 304B read with 34 of the
IPC
.

Allegations against the applicant, in short, are that he being
husband of Faujiya was involved in subjecting her to cruelty and
harassment due to non satisfaction of demand for dowry and, ultimately,
Faujiya died on 13/12/17 of brain infarction.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has
been falsely implicated in the case. Marriage of applicant was
solemnized with Faujiya on 12/4/13. She was sick since prior to her
marriage and after marriage her treatment was carried out by the
applicant and his family members only. She has not lodged any
complaint against anyone. She was also suffering from paralysis.
However, from 14/7/16, Faujiya had been residing with her parents and
has died on 13/12/17 at her parental home only. Earlier on 20/9/16,
father of Faujiya had registered a case under
section 498A
of the IPC
against the applicant and other family members. On 29/8/16 and
16/9/16, father of the applicant and applicant respectively had informed
the Police about being threatened by parents of the deceased of being
roped in a false case. An application under
section 125
of the Cr.P.C.
was also moved by father of the deceased, wherein he has specifically
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

M.Cr.C.No.10191/2018

(
Mujib Ahmad Khan Vs. State of M.P
.)

(2)

mentioned Faujiya to be suffering from TB and Paraylsis. It is submitted
that as per post moretm report, Faujiya has died due to brain infarction.
As she was residing with her parents for last more than 15 months,
therefore, ingredients of section 304B are not attracted to the fact
situation in hand. There is no direct or indirect involvement of the
applicant in the crime. Applicant is a permanent resident of Shivpuri and
there is no likelihood of his absconsion. With the aforesaid
submissions, prayer for anticipatory bail is made.

In response, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for
the complainant have opposed the bail application and pray for its
rejection. They submit that applicant, being the husband, is the main
accused. Besides, he is absconding and that is the reason why
investigation is not being completed. It is submitted that the applicant
was involved in harassing the deceased for non fulfillment of dowry, in
which regard a complaint was also lodged. Not being able to withstand
the harassment, Faujiya fell ill and ultimately was taken by her parents
for treatment. However, finally she succumbed. It is submitted that
applicant being the husband, his case cannot be said to be at par with
that of his father who has been extended the benefit of anticipatory bail
in M.CrC. No.5894/18 vide order dated 27/2/18 inter alia considering his
old age. Under such circumstances, it is submitted that no indulgence is
warranted.

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances, of
the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits thereof, in
the opinon of this Court, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made
out.

The application, accordingly, stands dismissed.

(S.A.Dharmadhikari)
Judge
(and)

Digitally signed by

ANAND SHRIVASTAVA

Date: 2018.03.22

17:01:04 +05'30'