SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ravi Kumar vs State on 8 May, 2019

% Judgment delivered on: 08.05.2019
+ BAIL APPLN. 1843/2018

RAVI KUMAR ….. Petitioner

STATE ….. Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Akshay Kumar Verma, Advocate.

For the Respondent: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with SI
Jasmer Singh, PS Jahangir Puri.




1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.255/2018 under Sections
304B/Section498A/Section34 IPC, Police Station Jahangir Puri.

2. The allegations in the FIR are that the daughter of the complainant
had got married a few months before her death. It is alleged that in-laws
used to trouble her and make demands of dowry.

3. Petitioner is the uncle (i.e. brother of the father of the husband).
Complainant in her statement has stated that she also approached the
petitioner for counselling the in laws of her daughter as he was the one,
who was instrumental in getting the marriage arranged and was therefore

BAIL APPLN. 1843/2018 Page 1 of 2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has
been falsely implicated as there is no material or allegation with regard to
the petitioner of making any demand of dowry or harassing the deceased.

5. By order dated 29.08.2018, the petitioner was granted interim
protection subject to his joining investigation.

6. Learned Addl. PP submits petitioner had joined investigation and the
investigation is complete and charge sheet has already been filed without

7. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view
of the totality of the facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that the
petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

8. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting
officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioner on bail, on petitioner furnishing
a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to
the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer/SHO
concerned. Petitioner shall not do anything that may prejudice either the
trial or the prosecution witnesses.

9. The petition is allowed in the above terms.

10. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

MAY 08, 2019/’rs’

BAIL APPLN. 1843/2018 Page 2 of 2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2021 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