SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Brijesh Kumar vs State on 10 December, 2018

$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment delivered on: 10.12.2018

+ BAIL APPLN. 2482/2018
BRIJESH KUMAR ….. Petitioner

versus

STATE ….. Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Saxena, Advocate.

For the Respondent : Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State.
SI Ashwani Kumar, PS Jyoti Nagar.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT

10.12.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.411/2017 under Sections
498A/304B/34 IPC, Police Station Jyoti Nagar. The petitioner is the
husband of the deceased.

2. The subject FIR was registered on the complaint of the father of
the deceased. The allegations in the FIR are that he had married his
daughter and given all gifts and articles as per his status. It is alleged
that in-laws of his daughter were demanding a car and as he could not

BAIL APPLN. 2482/2018 Page 1 of 3
fulfil their demands for providing a car, the in-laws were harassing the
deceased. The allegation is that since the demand was not met, the in-
laws of his daughter had murdered her by burning her.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated. He submits that there is no incriminating
evidence available to substantiate that the petitioner had ever
demanded any dowry or any vehicle or was harassing her apart from
the bald allegations of the father of the deceased.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
petitioner has been in custody since 30.09.2017 and two of the family
members have been discharged by the Trial Court as there was no
incriminating evidence available against them. He submits that the
statement given by the father was a general statement against the in-
laws and the petitioner has been roped in solely because he was the
husband of the deceased without there being any incriminating
material or allegation against him.

5. Without commenting on the merits of the case and on perusal of
the record, I am satisfied that petitioner has made out a case for grant
of regular bail.

6. Accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of
the Trial Court, petitioner shall be released on bail, if not required in

BAIL APPLN. 2482/2018 Page 2 of 3
any other case. Petitioner shall not do anything which may prejudice
either the trial or the prosecution witnesses.

7. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

8. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
DECEMBER 10, 2018
st

BAIL APPLN. 2482/2018 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation