Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAAMETI DEVI versus STATE

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


RAAMETI DEVI v STATE - CRLMB Case No. 5121 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 5180 (26 October 2007)

S.B.Cr.Misc. IIIrd Bail App. No.5121/2007

(Raameti Devi vs. State of Rajasthan)

Date of order : October 26, 2007

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

Mr.Kulwant Singh, for the petitioner.

Mr.Ashok Upadhyaya, Public Prosecutor.

Mr.M.K.Garg, for the complainant.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Public Prosecutor for the State and the counsel for the complainant. Perused the order impugned and the challan papers.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR was registered on "Parcha Bayan" of the deceased herself, wherein she categorically stated that on 16.6.2007, her husband, aunt-in-law (Bua Saas) and sister-in-law (Nand) poured the kerosene and put her to fire. The cause of death is burn injury as per the post mortem report. Thereafter, a dying declaration was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate,

Hanumangarh on 16.6.2007 at 1.50 P.M. in the presence of

Doctor, wherein the deceased categorically stated that Rakesh, her husband, aunt-in-law (Bua Saas) and sister-in-law (Nand) put her to fire. In both the dying declarations recorded by the police as "Parcha Bayan" and by the Judicial Magistrate, petitioner Raameti Devi, who is mother-in-law has not been named.

Learned counsel for the complainant submits that subsequently, deceased made an oral dying declaration, wherein the petitioner Raameti Devi has been named.

Be that as it may, in the initial dying declaration recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, petitioner Raameti Devi has not been named. In this view of the matter, without commenting on the merit of the case, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that in both the dying declarations, the petitioner has not been named causing death of the deceased, I consider 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 Raameti Devi w/o Kirtar alias Kirta Ram be released on bail in FIR

No.203/2007, P.S. Tibbi, Distt. Hanumangarh 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.