BHERU SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

(2.) The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 134/2017 of Police Station Samdari, District Balotra for the offences punishable under Ss. 498-A. 304-B/34 of IPC. He has preferred this bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the police investigation, it was reveled that the petitioner was living in Surat and doing some job. It is submitted that wife of the petitioner mostly used to live in her parental house after her marriage and used to return whenever the petitioner come to his village from Surat. It is submitted that allegation of harassment for dowry against the petitioner is false because when the petitioner used to live in Surat and his wife used to live in her parental house and it is difficult to comprehend that petitioner had harassed his wife for the purpose of dowry. It is submitted that PW-9 father of the deceased in his cross-examination had admitted that whenever petitioner went to Surat for working, his daughter used to live with them only. It is submitted that the deceased was not happy because the petitioner was living alone in Surat and despite asking of the deceased had not take her to Surat along with him. It is submitted that for this reason only, deceased had committed suicide.