Ramesh @ Pintu vs State Of Rajasthan

Kuldeep Mathur, J

This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.288/2022 registered at Police Station Osian, Dist. Jodhpur Rural, for the offences under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 302 of IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, the deceased- Pooja committed suicide on 29.10.2022 by jumping in a water tank along with her two children namely Ashish and Shivani. Learned counsel submitted that father of the deceased, Punam chand lodged a report at P.S. Osian on 29.10.22 stating therein that his daughter- Pooja was married with the present petitioner and that he used to harass and humiliate his daughter in connection with dowry demand. As per the written complaint lodged by the complainant- Punam Chand, his daughter could not tolerate the regular harassment caused to her by the present petitioner and therefore on 29.10.2022 committed suicide along with her two children by jumping in a water tank.

Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the Court towards the challan papers, learned counsel submitted that there is no iota of evidence available on record to indicate that the petitioner ever harassed the deceased in connection with dowry demand.

Learned counsel submitted that the statements of the complainant- Punam Chand (PW-01) and brother of the complainant- Munniram (PW-02) have already been recorded before the competent criminal court, wherein they have clearly denied the allegation of the deceased being met with cruelty or harassment for demand of dowry. It was further submitted that the material witnesses of the case have not supported the prosecution story before the competent criminal court and have turned hostile, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period.

Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that looking to the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the complainant- Punam chand (PW-01) and brother of the complainant- Munniram (PW-02), during their court statements have not supported the prosecution story and have turned hostile.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and after perusing the statements of PW-01 and PW-02, this Court prima facie finds that material witnesses of the case have not supported the prosecution story and have turned hostile. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the remaining prosecution witness or fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Consequently, the second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Ramesh @ Pintu S/o Jugta Ram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.288/2022 registered at Police Station Osia, Dist. Jodhpur Rural, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.