RAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner pray for grant of regular bail in FIR No.343 dated 27.08.2016 registered at Police Station Sadar Dadri, District Bhiwani, for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC).

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the complainant-Kuldeep, father of deceased Nainsi has raised general and vague allegations that Nainsi was tortured by Sachin-husband, Nitin-brother of Sachin, Raj Singh-father-in-law (petitioner herein), Saroj Bala-mother-in-law, Manju, Sarita, Neeraj and Jyoti-sisters-in-law. It is further submitted that on completion of investigation, challan has been presented against the husband and parents-in-law whereas Nitin-brother-in-law, Manju, Sarita, Neeraj and Jyoti-sisters-in-law were exonerated. It is further submitted that a similar role has been attributed to Saroj Bala-mother-in-law but she has been enlarged on bail by the trial Court vide order dated 20.01.2017. It is further submitted that the trial Court without drawing any distinction between the case of the present petitioner viz-a-viz that of Saroj Bala, mother-in-law has dismissed his prayer for grant of bail. It is further submitted that the material witnesses in the case have already been examined, therefore, there is no possibility of the petitioner tampering with the prosecution evidence in case enlarged on bail, when otherwise the petitioner is ready to face the proceedings, in accordance with law.

(3.) Counsel for the State has not disputed the factual assertions but states that only official witnesses including doctors remain to be examined and the case is fixed for 28.02.2017 for remaining evidence of the prosecution.