ANIL KUMAR MODI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length in this application for bail. It relates to the death of one Anju Bala. A case under Sec. 304-B Indian Penal Code has been registered. It was contended by Mr. Bajwa, learned counsel for the petitioner that Anju Bala was earlier married to one Pradeep Bhargava and he has shown to the court a marriage certificate from the Registrar of Marriages. It will be seen from the case diary that there is material on record from which it can be said that Pradip Bhargava was tried for an offence under Sec. 376 Indian Penal Code for allegedly committing sexual intercourse amounting to rape without the consent of Anju Bala. He was acquitted in the aforesaid case. It does not appear to have been held conclusively that Anju Bala was married with Pradip Bhargava. Therefore, for the present it will not be possible firstly to say whether as contended by Mr. Bajwa the second marriage with the accused petitioner of Anju Bala was not in accordance with law and even assuming that there may be some force in his argument, it is a matter which can be examined at a later stage whether or not the provisions of Sec. 304-B Indian Penal Code, even if the marriage could have taken place, if either of the parties to the marriage has living spouse, whether Sec. 304-B Indian Penal Code will be attracted or not and whether presumption under Sec. 113-B of the evidence Act can be available to the prosecution to make out a case of dowry death.

(2.) It was contended by Mr. Bajwa, learned counsel for the petitioner that no presumption under Sec. 113-B of the Evidence Act can be drawn in respect of dowry death because there is no material whatsoever that soon before the death of Anju Bala she had been subjected by the accused petitioner to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand of dowry. It was contended that there are letters, though undated, but which appear to have been written after the birth of a female child within 5 months of the death and there is nothing in those letters which goes to show that there was ever any demaud of dowry or the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment. The deceased according to the learned counsel, had made a statement to the doctor that she had taken three tablets of Selfos. According to the learned counsel, the possibility that she might have consumed the tablets of Selfos for any other reason including the reason that her in laws might have come to know about her earlier marriage and was under mental tension, cannot be excluded.

(3.) I would not like to express any opinion on the merits of the case and would not like to deal in detail the material which has been brought on record, but taking into consideration the provisions of Sec. 304-B Indian Penal Code and 113-B of the Evidence Act and that no prima facie case is made out on record that soon before her death the deceased Anju Bala was subjected by the accused petitioner to cruelty and harassment for or in respect of demand of dowry, I am inclined to release the accused petitioner on bail. Consequently, I allow this application for bail and direct that the accused petitioner-Anil Kumar, shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of the Rs.10,000.00 with two sureties each in the amount of Rs.5,000.00 to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance in that court or any other court in which he may be required to appear, on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. Application allowed.