Allowed

Sunil Gupta@Sonu S/O Shri Govind Narain Gupta v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 May 2020CRLMB/1372/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a bail application maintained by a husband accused of dowry death offences. The Court deemed it just to release the petitioner on furnishing a bond without expressing an opinion on the merits of the charges.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of alike amount.

Sunil Gupta@Sonu S/O Shri Govind Narain Gupta Vs State of… — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1372/2020

¶3

Sunil Gupta @ Sonu S/o Shri Govind Narain Gupta, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Umrain, Thana Sadar Dist. Alwar (At Present Accused Confined In Jail Dist. Jail Alwar)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Shandilya, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sher Singh Mehla, Public Prosecutor. Mr. Prakash Chand Thakuria, Adv. for the complainant.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

¶10

Order

¶11

04/05/2020

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is husband of the deceased and he has been implicated by the Police for committing offences under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC. Learned counsel argued that the Police after investigation has filed charge sheet and no independent witness has alleged anything about demand of dowry. Learned counsel further submitted that the independent witnesses on the contrary have stated that the deceased belonged to a poor family and there was no question of getting money from them. Learned counsel further submitted that the Doctor who had treated the deceased has also stated that she was suffering from stress and trauma for not giving birth to any child after marriage.

¶13

(2 of 3)

¶14

[CRLMB-1372/2020]

¶15

Learned counsel further submitted that the Police, in its investigation, has found that the deceased was found in bathroom and the door of the bathroom was bolted from inside. Learned counsel further submitted that there has been no evidence of demand of dowry or any cruelty soon before the death and the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application.

¶17

Mr. Prakash Chand Thakuria, learned counsel for the complainant submitted that death of the deceased has taken place in the unnatural circumstances and the theory of breaking the door is also falsified as the entire door was made of fiber sheet and was not found to be broken. Learned counsel further submitted that during investigation father of the deceased had also given evidence relating to demand of dowry by producing conversation having taken place between the parties and unfortunately, the Police in spite of such strong evidence against the petitioner, has not conducted the investigation in a fair manner and has ignored the said important piece of evidence against the accused petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that the accused petitioner being main accused and the husband of the deceased, may not be enlarged on bail.

¶18

Learned counsel further submitted that opinion of the Doctor about cause of death of the deceased was initially dependent on the FSL report but later on the Doctors, have opined that deceased died due to cardiac arrest and the same cannot be believed in the light of evidence against the accused petitioner.

¶19

(3 of 3)

¶20

[CRLMB-1372/2020]

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant through Video Conferencing.

¶22

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to release the petitioner on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, the present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Sunil Gupta @ Sonu S/o Shri Govind Narain Gupta, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of alike amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶24

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

¶25

Ramesh Vaishnav/86/10

Sunil Gupta@Sonu S/O Shri Govind Narain Gupta v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Gupta@Sonu S/O Shri Govind Narain Gupta v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Ayushi Gupta D/O Dr. Sunil Gupta Vs Union of India

Nahari B W/O Kishan Singh B/C Muslim Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahaveer Prasad Verma S/O Sh. Gobarilal Verma B/C Khatik Vs State of Rajasthan

Sandeep Tyagi S/O Shri Harendra Singh B/C Brahmin Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagta Ram Son of Shri Moti Ram Bagdi Vs State of Rajasthan

Om [email protected]. S/O Bhanaram B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan