RAVINDRA SINGH, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A. G. A. and sri Rajiv Goswami, learned counsel for the complainant. ( 2 ) THIS application is filed by the applicant Bhagat Singh with the prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 146 of 2005 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 364 I. P. C. and 3/4 dowry Prohibition Act, P. S. Highway district Mathura. ( 3 ) FROM the perusal of the record it reveals that in the present case F. I. R. was lodged by Pritam singh after 8. 6. 2005 in respect of the incident which had occurred after 4. 5. 2001. According to the persecution version Smt. Nirmala, Sister of the first informant, is tth wife of the applicant. Their marriage was solemnized on 4. 5. 2001. In he marriage dowry was given by the first informant according to his status but the applicant and other co-accused persons were not satisfied. They were demanding Rs. 1 lac in cash and to fulfill this demand they were harassing to Smt. Nirmala. Thereafter from the wedlock of the applicant and Smt. Nirmala a female child was born. ( 4 ) THEREAFTER the behaviors of the applicant and other co-accused persons was changed and they started beating of Smt. Nirmala. About two years prior lodging the present F. I. R. Smt. Nirmala was beaten and she was expelled by the applicant and other co-accused from their house. Thereafter a case was filed in the court by the father of the first informant, then the applicant and other co-accused accepted their mistake and taken away to Smt. Nirmala to their house but again she was extended threat that in case Rs. 1 lac was not given the applicant would perform second marriage. Smt. Nirmala was having a pregnancy of six months. The first informant got the information that the applicant and other co-accused persons, by way of conspiracy, for the purpose of performing the second marriage Smt. Nirmala was hidden. Efforts were made by the first informant to trace out his sister but no satisfactory reply was given by the first informant and others in respect of Smt. Nirmala. Thereafter the present F. I. R. was lodged by the first informant. Efforts were made by the first informant to trace out his sister but no satisfactory reply was given by the first informant and others in respect of Smt. Nirmala. Thereafter the present F. I. R. was lodged by the first informant. ( 5 ) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the present case Smt. Nirmala w/o of the applicant has not been concealed by the applicant and others co-accused persons. She is in the custody of the first informant because prior to the alleged occurrence an application under Section 125 Cr. P. C. was filed by Smt. Nirmala Devi and that was treated as a complaint but that was dismissed under Section 203 Cr. P. C. That application was given for the purpose of blackmailing. It is further contended that the allegation of demand of Rs. 1 lac as dowry is false as there is no evidence in support of this allegation. ( 6 ) IT is further contended that the applicant is an innocent persons and he has not committed this offence. ( 7 ) IT is opposed by the learned A. G. A. and learned cousnel for the complainant by submitting that the wife of the applicant is missing from his house till now she has not been recovered and no application has been given by the applicant in respect of her missing. The applicant being the husband is the sole responsible person to explain about the missing of his wife. ( 8 ) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstance of the case and the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is not entitled for bail at this stage. ( 9 ) ACCORDINGLY this bail application is rejected . .