KRISHAN MURARI AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal misc. 2nd Bail Application under section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner in FIR No. 163 of 2011 registered at Police Station Moti Dungari, Jaipur for offence unde4r sections 498 A, 304 B IPC and against the order dated 9.1.2012 passed by Special Judge, Women Atrocity and Dowry Cases Jaipur in Criminal Case No. 09/2012 by which the bail application of the petitioner was rejected.

(2.) The first bail application of the petitioner was rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 14.10.2011. After filing of the challan, the petitioner filed second bail application before the Special Judge, Women Atrocities and Dowry Cases, Jaipur for bail. The Special Judge after considering the material available on record, rejected the bail application of the petitioner vide his order dated 9.1.2012. Hence this second bail application has been filed.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the the petitioner is innocent and has nothing to do with the present crime. Kamna set herself on fire in the intervening night of 27.8.2011 28.11.2011 at about 2:30 a.m. On the request of police personnel her statement was recorded which find place in the challan paper at internal page 41 according her statement she has not alleged any incriminating allegation against the petitioner. It is stated by the counsel for the petitioner that before recording of this statement the Police has asked SDM, CJM as well as Medical Officer of Sawai Man Singh Hospital, Jaipur, Duty Doctor for recording the statement. The learned counsel further stated that the attending doctor certified that the deceased was in the condition wherein statement could have been recorded. In relation to recording of statement before Magistrate the learned counsel has stated that every endeavour was made but none appeared for recording the statement. It was argued that the statement recorded by the investigating agency is fully legal and acceptable by all legal parameters. It is further argued that the father- in- law the petitioner has not been alleged for any offence whatsoever and it was prayed that he be released on bail. The learned counsel has further argued that the basic dispute between the couple was with regard to one girl named Shalu Kumawat who is said to have been known to petitioner's son Yogesh @ Lucky Agrawal which was the main cause of perturbation for the deceased.