NARSI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.

(2.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a young had aged only 17 years of old. He further submits that the marriage of Smt. Rajwanti with the co-accused Geelia had taken place in the year 1981 He also read over to me the statements of all the witnesses to show that there is no evidence against the petitioner with regard to demand of dowry etc.

(3.) Contrary to this, the learned Public Prosecutor argued that a challan has been filed against the accused petitioner along with other co-accused persons. He also submits that a challan against the petitioner has filed under Sec. 299 Crimial P.C., as such, he should not be given benefit of pre-arrest bail.