Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Telangana High Court

Suresh Gandhi Suresh Gunda, vs The State Of Telangana, on 20 January, 2021

Author: G. Sri Devi

Bench: G. Sri Devi

            HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

            CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6936 OF 2020

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), is filed by the petitioner/A-2, for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.86 of 2020 of P.S. Jagathgirigutta, Cyberabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 35B, 354C, 506, 498-A and 342 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/A-2, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State and perused the record.

In the FIR, it is inter alia stated that the de facto complainant lodged a complaint on 25.02.2020 stating that her marriage was solemnized with one S.Bhargav on 01.11.2019 and at the time of marriage, her parents gave Rs.50,000/- cash and 14 tulas of gold as dowry. After 20 days of marriage, her husband brought the petitioner/A-2 to the house and the petitioner/A-2, in the absence of her husband, tried to touch her and forced her to fulfill his wish. Her husband threatened her to kill if she discloses the matter to any one. Her husband and the petitioner/A-2 took her naked photos and harassed her physically and mentally to get additional dowry from her parents. Hence, the complaint. 2

Learned counsel for the petitioner/A-2 would submit that the petitioner is innocent of the offence and he is no way concerned with the alleged offence. The petitioner/A-2 is a law-abiding citizen and is prepared to abide by any condition which this Court may deem fit to impose in case of granting anticipatory bail. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A-2.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A-2.

As seen from the contents of the F.I.R., there are specific allegations against the petitioner/A-2 with regard to molestation against the de fact complainant.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A-2.

The Criminal Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.

_________________ (G. SRI DEVI, J) 20th January 2021 RRB