SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

498A/324/307/34 Of The Indian … vs In Re : Dayasindhu Guria on 8 May, 2018



C.R.M. 2132 of 2018

In Re:- An application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 04.05.2018 in connection with Chandipur Police
Station Case No. 35 of 2018 dated 26.02.2018 under Sections
498A/324/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.


In Re : Dayasindhu Guria …… petitioner

Mr. Bhaskar Chandra Manna
…..for the petitioner

Ms. Sujata Das
….for the State

It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner

that there is a domestic dispute between the defacto complainant and the

petitioner who is the husband of the defacto complainant has been falsely

implicated in the instant case.

Learned Counsel appearing for State opposes the prayer for

anticipatory bail and submits that the defacto complainant was subjected

to electric shock by the petitioner.

Having considered the materials on record we note that domestic

dispute was over the issue of gift of ancestral property to the petitioner. It

is unclear from the medical report as to whether electric burn was

accidental or inflicted by hostile hands. We are of the opinion that

custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary in the facts

of the case but his movement requires to be restricted in order to instill

confidence in the mind of the defacto complainant.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioner shall be

released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-, with two sureties

of like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also subject

to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 on condition that he shall not enter the

jurisdiction of Chandipur Police Station except for attending the police

station until further orders and he shall provide the address where he

shall presently reside to the investigating agency as well as the learned

Court below.

This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation