VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material on record.

(2.) The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with FIR No. 323/2018 of Police Station Ratangarh, District Churu for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A, 406 IPC. They have preferred these anticipatory bail applications under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the allegations against the petitioners of demand of dowry and harassment are absolutely false. It is argued that as a matter of fact, there were some differences between complainant and her husband and on account of that, the complainant left her in-laws house and started living with her parents. It is submitted that the petitioners made repeated requests to the complainant to come to her in-laws house, which she refused and filed false FIR alleging that the petitioners harass her for the dowry. It is also submitted that the petitioners had appeared before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation on many occasions and pursuant to the direction given by this Court on 11/7/2019 also went to the police station along with Streedhan of the complainant but the complainant and her parents refused to receive the same. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, interrogation from the petitioners have also been completed, therefore, they may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.