gravity of offence, accusations made, complicity of accused and coupled with the fact that since applicant is a lady, therefore, she is entitled to the benefit of the provisions contained in proviso to Section 437 Cr.P.C., the bona-fide of the applicant is further explicit from the fact that except for the ligature mark, no other external ante-mortem injury was found on the body of deceased, the allegations made in the FIR regarding demand of additional dowry to the tune of Rs. 2 lacs and a two wheeler are not only false but concocted, the said allegations are vague and bald allegations as they are devoid of material particulars, since allegations with regard to the demand of additional dowry and commission of physical and mental cruelty upon the deceased on account of non fulfillment of additional demand of dowry have not been substantiated by the material particulars, therefore, the same are liable to be ignored by this Court at this stage, the judgment of Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam (Supra), applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased, therefore, she cannot be said to be the beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry, the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, 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 applicant stands crystallized, yet in spite of above, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, since prima-facie the death of deceased is a suicidal death, therefore the applicant is not liable to be awarded the maximum sentence under Section 304-B IPC in case, she is convicted, therefore, irrespective of the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to the present application for bail, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.
