Gujarat High Court
Dharmesh vs State
Author: Md Shah
Bench: Md Shah
CR.MA/15755/2011 5/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 15755 of 2011 ========================================= DHARMESH RADHESHYAM SHARMA - Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s) ========================================= Appearance : MR SV RAJU, SR. ADVOCATE FOR MR BHADRISH S RAJU for Applicant(s) : 1, MS KRINA CALLA, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, MR JB DASTOOR for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH Date : 31/01/2012 ORAL ORDER
[1] By way of present application, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed to release him on regular bail in connection with C.R.No.I-202 of 2011 registered with Isanpur Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498-A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
[2] It is alleged that deceased was married to present applicant before four years and she stayed with her husband and father in law on the first floor and on the other floor brother in law and wife of brother in law were staying in the same building. It is alleged that father in law, brother in law and wife of brother in law of the deceased used to instigate present applicant against deceased by taunting that she did not bring anything from her matrimonial house. It is alleged that there was constant demand of dowry for buying house and shop. It is alleged that submitted due to mental and physical cruelty on her by the accused persons, the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself with the help of Saree in the house of the present applicant on 05.08.2011.
[3] It is submitted by Mr.S.V.Raju, learned Senior advocate appearing for the applicant that incident took place after four years of marriage. From the plain reading of complaint, prima facie no case is made out under sections 498-A, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under section 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It is submitted that so far as allegation in reference to dowry and cruelty are concerned, they are vague and general in nature and so ingredients of section 107 of Indian Penal Code are not attracted and no offence is made out. It is submitted that as deceased was not able to conceive and as she was having some gynecological problem, she was under
depression and therefore, she committed suicide. It is submitted that deceased was already under treatment for infertility problem and therefore, she was not able to conceive and said treatment was provided by the present applicant which shows that applicant is not involved in the crime and false allegations are made. It is also submitted that father of the deceased invested Rs.1 lac by way of F.D. in his name as well as in the name of his wife, which shows that applicant has not committed crime and nominee of the said F.D. is deceased.
[3.1] It is submitted that if defence version and version of prosecution is contrary and if there is some substance in the defence, then, accused is entitled to get bail. It is also submitted that maximum sentence for the alleged offence is ten years. Mr.Raju, learned Senior advocate for the applicant has relied upon following decisions in support of above submission : -
Gurcharan Singh and ors. V/s. State (Delhi Administration) reported in (1978) 1 SCC 118.
M.P.Lohia v/s. State of W.B. And Anr. Reported in (2005) 2 SCC 686 Sanjay Chandra v/s. CBI reported in 2011 STPL (Web) 1006 SC Preeti Gupta and Anr. v/s. State of Jharkhand reported in (2010) 7 SCC 667.
[3.2.] Making above submissions and relying upon above decisions, it is requested to grant bail to the applicant.
[4] It is fairly submitted by learned APP on instructions that husband of the deceased used to provide medical treatment to the deceased with reference to gynecological problem.
[5] This Court has perused police papers. It has come on record that so far as demand of Rs.1 lac is concerned, father of the deceased invested the said amount in LIC Market Plus - I in the year 2010 in his name as well as in the name of his wife.
[6] This Court is in agreement with the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the decisions relied by the learned senior advocate for the applicant. Now so far as submission of the learned senior advocate for the applicant that that if defence version and version of prosecution is contrary and if there is some substance in the defence, then, accused is entitled to get bail is concerned, in the present case, it is true that applicant was providing treatment to deceased with reference to gynecological problem.
[7] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations and role attributed to the applicant and now the charge-sheet is filed, without entering into the merits of the case this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion to enlarge the applicant on bail.
[8] Hence, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with C.RNo.I-202 of 2011 registered with Isanpur Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offence alleged against him on his executing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall -
a) not take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty;
b) not to try to tamper or pressurise the prosecution witnesses or complainant in any manner;
c) maintain law and order and should cooperate the Investigating Officer;
d) mark presence before the concerned Police Station on every 1st of English Calender month between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. for one year.
e) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
f) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;
g) furnish the address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court;
h) surrender passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week.
[9] If the breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the concerned Court will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
[10] Bail before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
[M.D.Shah, J.] satish