JAFAR HUSSAIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought for regular bail under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime No.79/2019 of Kalaburagi Women Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under sections 498A , 302 , 304B read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for brevity referred to as ' IPC ') and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'D.P.Act').

(2.) Mother of deceased Tabasum Begum is the complainant in this case. According to her, her daughter Tabasum Begum was given in marriage to the present petitioner (accused no.1) about four years back and out of the marriage they got a boy born to them by name Faizan Hussain who is aged about two years now. The complainant has alleged that sufficient dowry in the form of cash and gold was given at the time of marriage. However, the husband and in-laws of the deceased were constantly pestering the deceased to bring more dowry from her parental house. The complainant says that his daughter was revealing her about the demand that was being made in her husband's house. It is also the allegation in the complaint that the husband and in-laws also started suspecting the character of deceased Tabasum. That being the case, the husband returned to India who had been in Dubai for about two years. After that, on 15.06.2019 in the afternoon at about 1 o' clock, deceased Tabasum telephoned to the complainant asking for her to send some clothes. The complainant replied stating that she would send it through her son when he returns home. However, at 3 o' clock in the same afternoon, her son-in-law, who is the petitioner herein telephoned to the complainant intimating her that Tabasum has hanged herself. These people rushed to the house only to notice the dead body of Tabasum with ligature mark around her neck and a belt was also found fallen on the spot. Suspecting the hands of the accused including the present petitioner and alleging that it was not a suicidal death but it was a murder by the husband, the complainant lodged a complaint in Crime No.79/2019 of the respondent-police. The same was registered for the offences punishable under sections 498A , 302 , 304(B) read with section 34 of IPC and under sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act. After completion of investigation, the police have omitted accused no.4 from the charge sheet and confining to the accused nos.1 to 3 wherein the present petitioner is accused no.1, have filed charge sheet for the said offences.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly there is no eyewitness to the alleged incident. Just two hours prior to her death, when the deceased had called her mother over telephone, she did not complain about the cruelty meted to her, if any. This would go to show that there was no cruelty practiced upon the deceased. Learned counsel also submits that admittedly the present petitioner was away from the country for about two years, as such, he subjecting the deceased for constant cruelty would not arise. Stating that there are no evidence to show the presence of the accused in the house at the time of incident, the learned counsel prays for enlargement of the accused on bail.