Saroj Rani vs State on 12 July, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. 3rd Bail No. 4634 / 2017
Saroj Rani W/o Om Prakash, Aged About 62 Years, By Caste
Arora, Resident of Ward No. 22, Hanumangarh Town District
Hanumangarh. (At Present Lodged in Sub Jail, Raisinghnagar).

—-Petitioner
Versus
The State of Rajasthan

—-Respondent
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Vinod Sharma.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.R.K.Bohra, P.P.
For Complainant(s): Mr.Rajendra Charan.
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order
12/07/2017

The present third application for bail has been filed under

Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody in

relation to F.I.R. No.33/2015, P.S. Raisinghnagar, District

Sriganganagar, for the offences under Sections 304B and 498A

IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public

Prosecutor and learned counsel representing the complainant.

Perused the material available on record.

The petitioner being a woman is in custody from 24.8.2015.

After rejection of the earlier bail application submitted on behalf of

the petitioner, material prosecution witnesses have been examined

at the trial.

Learned counsel Shri Sharma drew the Court’s attention to

the statement of P.W.6 Amandeep being the cousin brother of the
(2 of 2)
[CRLMB-4634/2017]

deceased, who stated that the petitioner went to the matrimonial

house of the deceased alongwith her husband Manish and the

parties were having heated discussion. In the meantime, the

witness went to Shiv Temple. When he came out at about 7

O’clock, the deceased and her husband Manish were seen standing

near the water works diggi. Soon thereafter, the deceased Jyoti

READ  H vs * The State Of Maharashtra on 3 July, 2013

committed suicide by jumping into the diggi. In this background,

the argument advanced by Shri Sharma that the last act just

before the suicide committed by the deceased Jyoti can at best be

attributed to the accused Manish is not without merit and

evidently the case of the present petitioner is distinguishable from

that of Manish.

In view of above and having regard to the entirety of facts

and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration

of the arguments advanced at the Bar, this Court is of the opinion

that the petitioner being a woman deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Consequently, this third application for bail is allowed. It is

ordered that the accused-petitioner namely Saroj Rani arrested in

connection with F.I.R. No.33/2015, P.S. Raisinghnagar, District

Sriganganagar shall be released on bail; provided she furnishes a

personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/-

each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the

stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and

as and when called upon to do so.

(SANDEEP MEHTA)J.

/tarun goyal/

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *