suicide on account of an immediate act of the applicant. With regard to the allegations made in the F.I.R. that Ertiga Car was given in dowry at the time of marriage, learned counsel for applicant contends that the same is factually incorrect. The vehicle in question was purchased by the applicant himself much before the marriage. The same is evident from the Hire Purchase Agreement, copy of which is on record at page-32 of the paper book. With regard to the allegations made in the F.I.R. that the demand of additional dowry of Rs. 3,00,000/-, was made the learned counsel for applicant contends that the said allegations made in the F.I.R. is simply vague and bald. The same is devoid of material particulars. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kahkashan kausar Vs. State of Bihar, (2022) 6 SCC 599 in support of above. He thus contends that in the absence of material particulars with regard to the manner and time regarding alleged demand of additional dowry the said allegation is liable to be ignored by this Court. Even otherwise applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 28.10.2022. As such has has undergone more than nine months of incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. Therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against the applicant stands crystallized. However up to this stage, no such circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during pendency of trial. To lend legal support to his submission, he has referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sumit Subhash Chandra Gangwal and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and another 2023 Live Law SC 373(5). He, therefore, submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In
