SUMIT BHUTTAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sumit Bhuttan, the petitioner has sought regular bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 164 dated 5.7.2011 at Police Station DLF Phase II, Gurgaon, District Gurgaon for an offence punishable under sections 302, 304B,306, 201 read with section 120B of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) For facts, it would be sufficient to say at this stage that Sumit Bhuttan, the petitioner is the husband of the deceased, Ruchi Bhuttan with whom he was married on 10.12.2005. She died on 5.7.2011 and there is a dispute as to the fact that she was murdered or she had committed suicide. There are allegations that the petitioner had harassed the deceased in connection with demand of dowry.

(3.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was dealing in shares as a franchisee of M/s Angel Broking Limited, Mumbai. He has submitted that the petitioner had his office at Delhi and the deceased was working in his office as a receptionist on a salary of Rs. 5,000/-per month. According to him, the petitioner was living a life of affluence as there was no dearth of money with him and that he lived such life till huge losses were suffered by him in the business. It is further submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that on 30.6.2010, the petitioner had gifted a Skoda car to the deceased. According to him, the deceased was also withdrawing a sum of Rs. 20,000/- per month from her account to help her parents.