SOHINI BAI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the accused-petitioner Mr. Choudhary vehemently submitted that while rejecting the bail application of the accused-petitioner, the learned Judge has not given any reason whatsoever, therefore, this bail application be accepted and the accused-petitioner be released on bail. He submitted that FIR is filed late by 20 days after the incident. He also submitted that in this case, the proceedings have been initiated under section 174 Crimial P.C. by the ADM City Magistrate. During that time, the complainant, her husband and others were present and they have clearly mentioned in writing that they had no doubt whatsoever about the death.of Sunita. On the basis of this, it was submitted by Mr. Choudhary that there was no harassment to the deceased Sunita from her in-law side. He submitted that Sunita committed suicide not because of the harassment from her in-law side, but because of her strained relations with none else, but with her mother and before the death also, there was some quarrel between the deceased and her mother and that was the reason for committing suicide by Sunita. Mr. Choudhary submitted that these contentions have been specifically raised in para No. 1 of the bail application submitted before the learned Sessions Judge, but the same have not at all been dealt with or discussed by the learned Judge in his order and without considering the same, the bail application of the accused-petitioner has been rejected.

(2.) On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Vyas submitted that the learned Sessions Judge was not required to assign any reason while rejecting the bail application of the accused-petitioner. He submitted that he has to satisfy himself from the case diary and other record produced before him and on the facts of this case, the learned Sessions Judge, on perusal of the case diary and other record, was fully satisfied that no case is made out to grant bail to the present accused-petitioner, therefore, the learned Judge without assigning reasons, rejected her bail application.

(3.) However, Mr. Choudhary, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner vehemently submitted that the learned Sessions Judge has not at all taken into consideration the fact that the accused-petitioner is an aged widow, who has been granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court,itself, but on filing challan papers, the learned Magistrate rejected the bail application, therefore, when she filed a common petition along with her daughter, her bail application was rejected, without considering the fact that she was granted bail by the Sessions Court itself.