Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT.JAMKU DEVI versus STATE

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SMT.JAMKU DEVI v STATE - CRLMB Case No. 3839 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 4107 (21 August 2007)

S.B.Cr.Misc. Bail App. No3839/2007

(Smt. Jhamku Devi vs. State of Rajasthan)

Date of order : August 21, 2007

HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR,J.

Mr.Suresh Kumbhat, for the petitioner.

Mr.Vishal Raj Mehta, Public Prosecutor.

Mr.N.S.Bhati, for the complainant.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Public

Prosecutor for the State assisted by counsel appearing for the complainant. Perused the order impugned as also the challan papers. I have carefully gone through the statements of the witnesses.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if there is any allegation of demand of dowry against the petitioner, then according to the prosecution witnesses, it was a year ago from the date of occurrence. There is absolutely no evidence that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her death.

I have gone through the statements of the various witnesses.

The marriage of deceased was solemnized with Bhakhar

Ram two years ago. Her husband is an employee in Railways

Court, Jodhpur, who met with an accident. According to the witnesses, most of the time, the deceased used to live at her parental house, however, only after the accident of her husband, she started living with her husband at Jodhpur. The petitioner is resident of village Bainan, Tehsil, Pipar City.

On careful perusal of the witnesses, in my view, if at all there had been any any demand of dowry, then it was a year ago from the date of occurrence and thus, there was no proximity.

Be that as it may, without commenting on the merit of the case, which may prejudice the case of either party at the trial, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the oral arguments advanced by both the parties, I think it just and proper to enlarge the accused petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Sec. 439

Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Smt. Jhamku

Devi w/o Chhogaramji be released on bail in FIR No.106/2007,

P.S., Pipar City provided she furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for her appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

(H.R.PANWAR),J. m.asif/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.