This court dismissed a bail application filed under Section 438 CrPC in a matrimonial dispute involving dowry harassment, holding that recovery of articles was pending and serious allegations made granting bail improper.
Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC dismissed; interim order vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9929/2013 (Jitendra Versus State of Rajasthan)
Date of Order :: 8th January, 2014
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Mr. Manoj Singh Raghav, for the petitioner Mr. Peeyush Kumar, PP for the State Mr. Anil Upman with Mr. Kartar Singh, counsel for the complainant
This bail application has been filed under Section 438
CrpC.
Brief facts of the case are as under:
“The complainant Shikha Agarwal W/o accused petitioner Jitendra submitted a complaint before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Bharatpur against the accused petitioner and other family members of the accused petitioner stating inter-alia that the marriage of the complainant was solemnized on 1.5.2011 as per the Hindu customs and rites with the petitioner at Gayatri Marriage Home, Bharatpur, in which the father of the complainant incurred expenses of about Rs. 20.00 lakh as per the demand of the accused petitioner. The father of the complainant gave Rs. 8.00 lakh cash to the accused in the marriage. The accused demanded Rs. 7.00 lakh more and Swift Dzire car, Fridge, LCD, TV, Laptop. To satisfy the demands, the complainant's father gave Rs. 20.00 lakh more and when the complainant went at her inlaws house, then the accused petitioner assaulted her.”
This complaint was referred to the concerned Police Station, Mathura Gate for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC, District Bharatpur, upon which the police registered FIR No.
155/2013 for the offence under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 IPC and 4/6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Since after investigation, the police wanted to arrest the accused petitioner, as such he moved the bail application under Section 438 CrPB before the Additional Sessions Judge, Bharatpur, who vide order dated 9.10.2013 dismissed the said bail application. Against the said order dated 9.10.2013, this bail application has been filed by the petitioner before this Court under Section 438 CrPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the accused petitioner has been falsely implicated in this matter. The co-accused father and mother of the accused petitioner have been released on bail under Section 438 CrPC. He has further contended that the court below, while rejecting the bail application of the accused petitioner, has not assessed the medical report and other evidence in accordance with law, which are available in the case diary. He has further contended that the petitioner has got the social status in the society and he is not required for any purposes and in interrogation nothing is required to be recovered from him. as such, he should be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned PP assisted by counsel for the complainant have opposed the same. The investigating officer is present in the Court along-with the case diary. They have contended that father of the complainant had taken loan from GPF Account and spent money in the marriage of her daughter i.e.
Shikha Agarwal and number of dowry articles are still to be recovered from the accused petitioner. They have further contended that the petitioner gave mental, economical and physical torture to the complainant and at this stage when the recovery is pending in this matter, the anticipatory bail should not be granted to the accused petitioner.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusing the case diary, I am in agreement with the findings arrived at by the learned trial court in his order dated 9.10.2013.
The relevant part of the order dated 9.10.2013 reads as
under:
"हमने उभयप� क� बहस पर मनन �कया गया व अनुसंधान प�ावल� का अवलोकन �कया व सस�मान सू�मता से �या�यक ��ा�त� का अवलोकन �कया। प�रवादनी ने एफआईआर म� संगीन व गंभीर आरोप लगाये ह� जब�क प�रवादनी का प�त �ाथ�/अ�भयु� एक पढ़ा �लखा समाज म� अ�छे �तर पर सीए के �प म� �था�पत है। केस डायर� के अनुसार प�रवादनी को तंग करना, दमन करना व मान�सक �प से संताप व �पटाई करना और उसके साथ अ�ील हरकत करना भी �थम ��या सामने आता है। यह सभी आरोप गंभीर �कृ�त के ह�। केस डायर� के अवलोकन से दहेज के सामान क� अभी बरामदगी अभी शेष है अत: इस �तर पर �करण के त�य एवं प�रि�थ�तय� को देखते हुए �करण के गुणावगुण पर �बना कोई राय �य� �कये �ाथ� को अ��म जमानत का लाभ �दया जाना �यायो�चत �तीत नह�ं होता है।"
In view of above, I do not think it proper to allow this bail
application filed under Section 438 CrpC and the same being bereft of any merit, is hereby dismissed.
The interim order dated 23.10.2013 passed by this Court stands vacated. The application no. 11223 dated 29.10.2013 filed by the complainant stands disposed of accordingly.
( Mahesh Chandra Sharma)J .
DK
All corrections made in the judgment / order have been incorporated in the judgment / order being E-mailed.
Dilip Khandelwal PA
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's bail application under Section 438 CrPC should be allowed given pending recovery of dowry articles and serious allegations.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jitendra
State of Rajasthan
Mahesh Chandra Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
