Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ashok Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Ashok Sharma vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 01, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1039788

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ashok Sharma

Advocate Shri. Arvind Sharma

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....the prosecutrix was not agree with the aforesaid marriage, he falsely implicated these applicants. prosecutrix is more than 16 years of age. in support of the contention, he filed a certificate from the government school, hatri district damoh. nothing is required to be seized from the possession of the applicants. applicants are reputed persons of the society and in the event of arrest, their reputation would be tarnished., therefore they prays for grant of anticipatory bail. learned counsel for the state opposes the application for grant of anticipatory bail. on due consideration of the contention raised on behalf of the parties alongwith facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, i am of the view that it is fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. the application is allowed. it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail on their each furnishing a personal bond in the sum of rs.30,000/- (rupees thirty thousand) with a solvent surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of arresting officer subject to compliance of terms and conditions as enumerated in section 438(2) of cr.p.c.it is further directed that applicants shall join the investigation and fully co-operate with the investigating agency. this order shall remain in force for a period of 60 days. during this period, if the applicants so desire, may move an application for regular bail before the competent court, which shall be considered by that court in accordance with law. c.c.as per rules. (g.s.solanki) judge ravi

Full Judgment

M.Cr.C.No.2350/2013 1.4.2013 Shri Arvind Sharma , counsel for applicants.

Shri R.K.Kesharwani, PL , for the State.

Heard.

This is the fiRs.bail application filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of anticipatory bail to applicants.

The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.233/2012 registered at Police Station Nohta District Damoh for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366(ka)/34 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case.

They have no criminal past.

They are ready to co-operate during investigation.

The applicants are father and mother of the co-accused Sanjay, who got marriage with the prosecutrix Guddi.

Since the father of the prosecutrix was not agree with the aforesaid marriage, he falsely implicated these applicants.

Prosecutrix is more than 16 years of age.

In support of the contention, he filed a certificate from the Government School, Hatri District Damoh.

Nothing is required to be seized from the possession of the applicants.

Applicants are reputed persons of the society and in the event of arrest, their reputation would be tarnished., therefore they prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the application for grant of anticipatory bail.

On due consideration of the contention raised on behalf of the parties alongwith facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

The application is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail on their each furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with a solvent surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer subject to compliance of terms and conditions as enumerated in Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.It is further directed that applicants shall join the investigation and fully co-operate with the Investigating Agency.

This order shall remain in force for a period of 60 days.

During this period, if the applicants so desire, may move an application for regular bail before the competent Court, which shall be considered by that Court in accordance with law.

C.C.as per rules.

(G.S.Solanki) JUDGE ravi

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial