Sonelal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Sonelal vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jul 31, 2012

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1047766

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1047766
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Jul 31, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sonelal

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. applicant no.1 is father-in-law, applicant no.2 is mother-in-law and applicant no.3 is married sister-in-law of complainants kamini and bhanu. applicant no.3 is residing separately, she has delivered a child recently. the applicants are reputed citizens of the locality, in the event of arrest their reputation will be tarnished, therefore, they be released on ad-interim anticipatory bail. learned counsel for state has opposed the application. considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, i do not find it a fit case for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to applicant nos.1 and 2, their application is dismissed. on due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties, i am of the considered view that it is a fit case to grant ad-interim anticipatory bail to applicant no.3 smt. radhabai, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, her application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant no.3 smt. radhabai shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in a sum of rs.30,000/- (rs.thirty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/competent court. applicant no.3 smt. radhabai shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. she shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of section 438 of cr.p.c.this order shall remain in force till disposal of the main application under section 438 of cr.p.c.list for final hearing in the week commencing 20.8.2012 certified copy as per rules. (g.s.solanki) judge pb

Full Judgment

31.7.2012 Shri G.S.Thakur, Advocate for the applicants.

Shri Chandrakant Mishra, GA for the State.

Admit.

Call for the case diary.

Heard on I.A.No.14886/2012, an application for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicants.

The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.251/2012 registered at P.S.Hatta, District Damoh for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A/34 of the IPC.

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

Applicant No.1 is father-in-law, applicant No.2 is mother-in-law and applicant No.3 is married sister-in-law of complainants Kamini and Bhanu.

Applicant No.3 is residing separately, she has delivered a child recently.

The applicants are reputed citizens of the locality, in the event of arrest their reputation will be tarnished, therefore, they be released on ad-interim anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for State has opposed the application.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to applicant Nos.1 and 2, their application is dismissed.

On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to grant ad-interim anticipatory bail to applicant No.3 Smt.

Radhabai, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, her application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant No.3 Smt.

Radhabai shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs.Thirty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/competent Court.

Applicant No.3 Smt.

Radhabai shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

She shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.This order shall remain in force till disposal of the main application under section 438 of Cr.P.C.List for final hearing in the week commencing 20.8.2012 Certified copy as per rules.

(G.S.Solanki) Judge PB

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Sonelal vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education