Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 19 (CHH)

KUMI @ KUMKUM KUMARI SINHA v. STATE OF C. G.

2012-01-11

MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA

body2012
ORDER Heard. The applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 83/2011 regi6tered in police station - Kamleshwarpur, District - Sarguja, for alleged commission of offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Arti Sinha committed suicide due to continuous harassment and cruelty. The allegation of the prosecution is that the harassment and cruelty for long time instigated the deceased to commit suicide. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the involvement of the applicants in the alleged offence is only an act of revengeful attitude of the in-laws of the deceased. He submits that at the time of marriage in the year 2002, the applicants were minor. He further submits that the allegation relating to demand of dowry and harassment are general and vague in nature and does not state what role was played by the applicants in raising demand or harassing the deceased. Learned counsel submits, looking to the age of the applicants at the time and within 2-3 years of marriage, the allegation of demand are highly improbable and they have been involved because each and every member of the family has been made accused. He further submits that applicant No.1 is married sister-in-law and residing separately and applicant No.2 is a young girl aged 20 years. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, opposing the bail application, submits that the deceased committed suicide in matrimonial house by hanging. He submits that the case diary statements show the manner in which she was subjected to cruelty and harassment after 2-3 years of marriage and due to long harassment and cruelty, she was instigated to commit suicide. He further submits that each and every member of the family has been alleged to be involved in demand of dowry and harassment. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration that at the time of marriage of the deceased, the applicants were too young and further taking into consideration that there are no specific allegations against the applicants, but general allegation' and further taking into consideration that the applicant No.1 is a married lady and applicant' No. 2, is a young girl aged 20 years and that some of the accused have been granted regular bail, I am inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of applicants in connection with the aforesaid offence, they shall be released on bail by the arresting officer on each of them furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- with two sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer with following further conditions that: (i) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. Certified copy as per rules. Application Allowed.