ROSHNI DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . Dinarpur, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that most of the dowry articles including golden ornaments have already been returned to the complainant. He further contends that the petitioners are not alleged to have caused any injury to the complainant and, therefore, the offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out against the petitioners.

(2.) MR . B.B. Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, however, submits that the main accused i.e. the husband of the complainant is absconding and, therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to the grant of bail.