Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 546 (RAJ)

Hansraj v. State of Rajasthan

2025-03-03

KULDEEP MATHUR

body2025
ORDER : KULDEEP MATHUR, J. 1.This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.140/2024 registered at Police Station Chattargarh, Dist. Bikaner, for the offences under Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, the deceased owing to her matrimonial discord with the present petitioner on 19.05.2024, committed suicide. 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 the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 IPC i.e. (i) the abettment, (ii) the intention of the deceased to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide are not present in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that there is nothing on record to indicate that the petitioner had mens rea or intention to aid or instigate the deceased to commit suicide. 4. 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. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. 6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that though as per the prosecution, the deceased committed suicide due to the continuous dowry demand made by the petitioner but prima facie no specific details with regard to the dowry demand are available on record of the case. This Court also prima facie finds that there is no direct evidence available on record indicating that the petitioner had any mens rea or intention to aid or instigate the deceased to commit suicide. This Court also prima facie finds that the petitioner is in judicial custody; the investigation against the petitioner has already been completed and the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of petitioner influencing the material prosecution witnesses of the case 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. 7. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Hansraj S/o Magha Ram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.140/2024 registered at Police Station Chattargarh, Dist. Bikaner, 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. 8. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.