SUNILKUMAR RAJESHWARPRASAD SINHA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Apprehending arrest, the applicants by way of present application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, have prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11191038211533 of 2021 registered with Vatva Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences under Ss. 306, 498-A, and 114 of the IPC and Ss. 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) Facts and circumstances giving rise to file the present application is that, the applicants are father-in-law and mother-in-law of deceased Ranita. Accused No. 1 Premkumar is the husband of the deceased. Marriage was solemnized on 29/5/2021. The alleged incident of suicide took place on 8/10/2021. The first informant is the brother of the deceased, residing at village Tinsufiya, State Assam. After the marriage, deceased was residing with the husband in joint family at Ahmedabad. It is alleged in the FIR that, the accused herein harassed the deceased by demanding dowry and in any domestic petty issue, she was subjected to cruelty. It is stated by the informant inter alia stating in the FIR that, prior to the incident, deceased came to parental home and informed the family members about the cruelty and harassment committed by the accused. In this background fact, it is alleged that, the deceased committed suicide at matrimonial home by hanging herself due to instigation on the part of the accused and have abetted in the alleged suicide committed by his sister. Hence, this FIR.

(3.) Mr. N.T. Gandhi, learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the facts of the case do not constitute the offence punishable under Sec. 306 of IPC as there is no specific allegation that, the applicants have instigated or abetted the deceased to commit suicide. So, he submitted that prima facie no offence under Sec. 306 of IPC is made out. He further submitted that the applicants being in-laws of the deceased have not played any role so far the allegation of commission of the offence of cruelty and demand of dowry is concerned. The husband - accused No. 1 has been arrested and he is behind the bar. It is therefore, submitted that, before marriage and thereafter, deceased was suffering the illness of depression and considering the age of the applicants, discretion may be exercised in their favour by granting pre-arrest bail by imposing appropriate terms and conditions.