SUNIL @ SALIM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks pre -arrest bail from this Court after having failed to succeed before the Sessions Court as he apprehends his arrest by the police in a case registered against him for his having abetted the commission of suicide by one Bunti, who according to him now was his beloved wife. Suicide was committed by the deceased wife of the petitioner by consuming poison on 17th June,2012.The investigating poison on 17th June, The investigating agency has recorded the statements of the family members of the deceased and they hold the petitioner and his family members responsible for the commission of suicide by the deceased Bunti. There are allegations of constant harassment of the deceased by the petitioner and his family members because of her having failed to fulfil their greed of dowry. The harassment allegedly increased for some years before the commission of suicide by the deceased when she came to know that her husband, the petitioner herein, was having an extra marital relations with another woman living his neighbourhood and when she protested to her husband and requested him not to have any such relationship with another woman since that would have adverse impact on their growing children but he did not pay any heed to that protest and request. Then she told the same thing to his parents also they instead of showing sympathy to her started beating her. She was told that she should let her husband live happily. The petitioner also beat her for complaining about his extra marital affair to his parents and threatened her that if she would spread that affair further he would kill her and also said that 'yaar to aise hi mauj leinge" and in she will have to live in that scenario only if she wanted to stay with him. It was claimed by the sister of the deceased at whose instance FIR was registered that on 16th June, 2012 when her deceased sister saw the petitioner with the other woman and she protested to him again and also he had beaten her and told her that "tu kahin jaa kar mar hamhe khush rehne dey....".

(2.) MR . Ramesh Gupta, learned senior counsel for the petitioner -accused submitted, relying upon orders in Bail Application No. 3137/2005, "Sanjay Dhillon Vs. State" and "Krishna & Ors. Vs. State"; Bail Application No. 880/2012, "Dr. Mohd. Sohail Fazal Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) passed by different Benches of this Court in cases of suicide and in which on the facts of those cases this Court had granted anticipatory bails, had submitted that on the basis of the allegations which are now being leveled by the family of the deceased only a case of harassment of the deceased for dowry can at the most be said to be made out but certainly not of abetment of suicide by the deceased by the petitioner -husband. So, Mr. Gupta submitted that this is also a fit case where the petitioner also deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.

(3.) THE order of the Supreme Court relied upon by Mr. Dudeja reads as under: -