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
8 paragraphs · 452 wordsD.K. Paliwal, J.—Heard. Perused the case diary.
This is the first bail application filed by the applicant u/s 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 250/2013 registered at P.S. Dehat Bhind, District Bhind for the offence punishable under sections 304-B of IPC.
As per the prosecution case in 2004 deceased was married with the brother of the applicant. However, later on decree of divorce has been passed. Thereafter, the applicant, who is the younger brother of Sanjeev, was married with the deceased on 30.4.2012. Applicant used to demand of cash of Rs. 10,000/- and due to this tortured the deceased and on 29.6.2013 deceased died in the suspicious circumstances.
It is submitted that applicant has falsely been implicated. It is submitted that father of the deceased, who is posted at Police Station, Dehat Bhind and no report has been lodged regarding the demand of dowry. It is further submitted that the deceased was earlier married with the elder brother of the applicant and no allegation has been made regarding demand of dowry. It is prayed that applicant be released on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the application and submits that deceased died under suspicious circumstances within seven years of marriage and she has been harassed and tortured in connection with demand of dowry, hence applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail.
Taking into consideration the fact that deceased was earlier married with the elder brother of the applicant and after about 7 years after divorcing the elder brother of the applicant, she married with the applicant and also taking into consideration the allegation of demand of Rs. 10,000/- alongwith the nature of allegation made against the applicant, I am of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with a surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting officer/competent Court. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required and he will co-operate in the investigation. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
This order shall remain operative for a period of sixty days and during this period the applicant is free to move the regular bail application before the concerned Court. C.C. as per rules.
