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
7 paragraphs · 403 wordsVijay Bishnoi, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
The petitioner(s) has/have been arrested in FIR No.103/2017 of Police Station Panchu, District Bikaner for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 498A, 304B and 302 IPC. He/she/they has/have preferred this/these second bail application(s) under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after rejection of the earlier bail application of the petitioner, as many as nine prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial court. It is argued that PW-1 and PW-2, brother and uncle of the deceased respectively though have alleged that the petitioner used to harass the deceased for the purpose of dowry and has also treated her with cruelty, but at the same time, have admitted that they never complained with regard to the behaviour of the petitioner with the deceased anywhere. It is further submitted that the important prosecution witnesses such as neighbours of the petitioner have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. It is also argued that as a matter of fact, it is a case of suicide, but the complainant party with the intention to implicate the petitioner has lodged a false case against him as also levelled false allegations regarding harassment and cruelty in their court statement. It is submitted that evidence of the brother and uncle of the deceased is not reliable as the same lack corroboration. Learned counsel has submitted that as the petitioner is in custody since 8.9.2017 and trial against him has not been concluded till date, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the petitioner(s) under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this/these second bail application(s) filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is/are allowed and it is directed that petitioner(s) – Pannaram S/o Mohanram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.103/2017 of Police Station Panchu, District Bikaner provided he/she/they execute(s) a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his/her/their appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
