AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 707 wordsAnil Kumar Choudhary, J
Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.13 of 2019 (G.R. No. 477 of 2019) registered under sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.
The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that they have committed the dowry death of the deceased. It is further alleged that the petitioners and their son used to demand dowry from the sister of the informant and the deceased was used to be treated with cruelty in connection of demand of dowry. It is also alleged that there is specific averment made by the informant in the F.I.R. itself that Rs.3,00,000/- was allegedly demanded by the petitioners for being invested in the business of their son and Rs.1,80,000/- was given by the informant. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations against the petitioners are false. It is then submitted that the deceased has a two years old son who is looked after by the petitioners as the husband of the deceased is in jail. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case. It is then submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to make a fixed deposit of Rs.6,00,000/- in the name of the son of the victim namely Abhiraj Sharma in any nationalized bank with the informant as his guardian, at least for a period of two years with auto renewal clause with the condition that the same will not be withdrawn till the said Abhiraj Sharma attains the age of majority. It is then submitted that the petitioners used to live in the ground floor of the house separately and the deceased used to live in the first floor and on the date of the occurrence the deceased went to the first floor after entrusting the custody of the said Abhiraj Sharma to the petitioner no.1, like any other normal day, without giving any inkling that she is going to commit suicide. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that the informant-Manish Kumar is ready and willing to be the guardian for the limited purpose of the fixed deposit being made in the name of the said Abhiraj Sharma and will take all steps for facilitating making of the said fixed deposit.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of four months from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on showing the proof of fixed deposit of Rs.6,00,000/- in the name of the son of the victim namely Abhiraj Sharma in any nationalized bank with the informant as his guardian, at least for a period of two years with auto renewal clause with the condition that the said amount will not be withdrawn till the said Abhiraj Sharma attains the age of majority or becomes entitled to operate the said account independently and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Jamshedpur, in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.13 of 2019 (G.R. No. 477 of 2019) with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile numbers and a copy of their Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case and other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.
