MADAN LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.

(2.) Contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that evidence that has been collected by the investigating agency clearly revealed that deceased Rina was used to be tortured and harassed by her in-laws. She was forced by them for bringing the ornaments, which in fact were given by them (in-laws) in the marriage, which was retained by her parents when she went to their house. Learned Counsel, in this connection referred to the statements of the various witnesses.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and has argued that the evidence is also to the effect that father-in-law and mother-in-law i.e. petitioners herein and husband of the deceased used to harass the deceased and they wanted to get rid off her. The death of deceased took place in mysterious circumstances. The police was not informed by the petitioners, nor was any information given by them to the parents about the death of the deceased and she was cremated even before their arrival.