Praveen Son Of Shri Gajraj Singh vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 2813 Raj/2

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      BENCH AT JAIPUR

          S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
                                 9043/2021

1.         Praveen Son Of Shri Gajraj Singh, Resident Of Salarpur,
           Police Station Khushkheda, District Alwar, Rajasthan. (At
           Present Confined At Sub Jail Kishangarh Bas District
           Alwar)
2.         Monu Son Of Shri Gajraj Singh, Resident Of Salarpur,
           Police Station Khushkheda, District Alwar, Rajasthan. (At
           Present Confined At Sub Jail Kishangarh Bas District
           Alwar)
                                                                        ----Petitioners
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                       ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Tiwari present in the Court For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

12/07/2021

1. Petitioners have filed this bail application under Section 439

Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.182/2019 was registered at Police Station

Khuskheda, District Alwar for offence under Sections 498-A & 304-

B I.P.C.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that the

deceased died on 09.08.2019. There were no marks of external

injuries on her person. Deceased was pregnant and she had

returned from her father's house fifteen days prior to the date of

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-9043/2021]

death. Deceased was in extreme pain and was under stress and

the probability of her consuming insecticide cannot be ruled out. It

is also contended that petitioner-Praveen took his wife to the

hospital for treatment but she died. It is further contended that

there is no evidence that the poison was administered to her. It is

also contended that there is no evidence that there was demand

of dowry soon before death. It is argued that petitioners have

remained in custody for a period of four months.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the

petitioners, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

7. This bail application is, accordingly, allowed and it is directed

that accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of

them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

(Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction

of the trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before

that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on

all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do

so.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

ARTI SHARMA /9

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)