Mohammad Haroon Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Mohammad Haroon vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Mar 25, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1048903

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/1048903
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Mar 25, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mohammad Haroon

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....(nand) of complainant dr. shiny anjum. the complainant lodged false report against applicants after 10 months of the divorce. son of applicant nos.1 and 2 dr. arif qureshi is also living separately. he is posted in another place. it is a matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife. the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. the applicants are reputed citizen 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. on due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the considered view that it is a fit case to grant ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicants, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, i.a.no.6220/2013 is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in a sum of rs.30,000/- (rs.thirty thousand only) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. the applicants are directed to join the investigation and fully co-operate with the investigating agency. they 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 in the week commencing 15.4.2013. certified copy today. (g.s.solanki) judge pb

Full Judgment

M.Cr.C.No.3399/2013 25.3.2013 Shri Imtiyaz Hussain, Advocate for the applicants.

Shri Punit Shroti, PL for the State.

Admit.

Call for the case diary.

Heard on I.A.No.6220/2013, an application for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicants.

The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.1/2013 registered at P.S.Mahila Thana, District Sagar for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 376, 511, 294/34 of the IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted 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 sister-in-law (Nand) of complainant Dr.

Shiny Anjum.

The complainant lodged false report against applicants after 10 months of the divorce.

Son of applicant Nos.1 and 2 Dr.

Arif Qureshi is also living separately.

He is posted in another place.

It is a matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife.

The applicants have been falsely implicated in this case.

The applicants are reputed citizen 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.

On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to grant ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicants, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A.No.6220/2013 is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs.Thirty Thousand only) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

The applicants are directed to join the investigation and fully co-operate with the investigating agency.

They 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 in the week commencing 15.4.2013.

Certified copy today.

(G.S.Solanki) Judge PB

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Mohammad Haroon vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education