Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 319 (RAJ)

Jitendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2019-01-25

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record. 2. The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 76/2018 of Police Station Sukher, District Udaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that as a matter of fact the wife of the petitioner committed suicide on 11.12.2018 in her parental house, where the petitioner was not present. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that from the statements of witnesses viz. Narpat Singh, recorded on 23.04.2018, Gulram Meena, Mamta Meena and Narendra Singh, recorded on 11.05.2018, it is clear that the deceased was not happy with her marriage with the petitioner as the petitioner was residing in a village and the deceased wanted to live in Udaipur only. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that all the above named witnesses have specifically stated in their statements, recorded on 23.04.2018 and 11.05.2018, that the petitioner never harassed the deceased for dowry, rather, the deceased did not want to go to her in-laws and when her parents forcibly sent her to her in-laws on 03.02.2018, she went away from there without informing to anybody and returned to Udaipur only on 07.02.2018 and thereafter consumed poison on 11.02.2018 in her parental house. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the police thereafter recorded the supplementary statements of witnesses viz. Mamta Meena, Gulram Meena and Narendra Singh in October 2018, wherein they have alleged that the petitioner harassed the deceased for dowry. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the supplementary statements of above named witnesses, it is clear that they were taken under pressure. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the omnibus allegations have been levelled against the petitioner by the relatives of the deceased regarding demand of dowry. It is argued that the deceased was not happy with her marriage with the petitioner and she did not want to live in the village, therefore, she committed suicide. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial of the case will take time. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 6. It is argued that the deceased was not happy with her marriage with the petitioner and she did not want to live in the village, therefore, she committed suicide. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial of the case will take time. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 6. 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 accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 7. Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner - Jitendra Singh S/o Nathu Singh shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No. 76/2018 of Police Station Sukher, District Udaipur provided he executes a personal bond in a 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 appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.