Balram Godara And Others vs State Of Rajasthan

Kuldeep Mathur, J

This application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners, in connection with FIR No.154/2020 registered at Women Police Station Hanumangarh, for offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 376/511, 354, 509, 504 and 34 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been implicated in a false case. Learned counsel submitted that the allegation against the petitioners who are aged about 70 years and 68 years respectively is that they are demanding dowry from their daughter in law and are also not returning the dowry (Stridhan), which was given at the time of marriage. Learned counsel submitted that the marriage between the complainant and son of the petitioners was solemnised on 13.2.2006. Learned counsel submitted that the FIR has been lodged on 04.07.2020 i.e. almost after 14 years of their marriage only with a view to harass and humiliate the petitioners. Learned counsel submitted that the son of the petitioners is in hand in gloves with the complainant and no allegation has been levelled against him.

Learned counsel submitted that as a matter of fact that the FIR has been lodged against the present petitioners only with a view to pressurise them to give possession of their properties and other assets. To substantiate this contention, attention of the Court was drawn towards FIR No.388/2020 dated 21.07.2020 lodged by the petitioners’ son- Vijay Pal (husband of the complainant)- at PS Hanumangarh Junction under Section 420, 406 and 120B of IPC. Learned counsel submitted that in the said FIR, Investigation Officer submitted negative final report on 08.09.2020

Learned counsel submitted that pursuant to the interim protection granted by this Court on 24.01.2023, the petitioners have already joined the investigation. Learned counsel submitted that looking to the advance age of the petitioner and the fact that the custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is not necessitated and also there is no apprehension of the petitioners interfering with the smooth investigation, therefore, no fruitful purpose will be served by sending the petitioners behind the bars for an indefinite period. Learned counsel thus, prayed that the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at bar, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioners- (i) Balram Godara S/o Sh. Bhiyaram Godara and

(ii) Smt. Santosh Devi W/o Sh. Balram in connection with FIR No.154/2020 registered at Women Police Station Hanumangarh, the petitioners shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned investigating officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions:

(i). that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii). that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer; and

(iii). that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.