SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

With Sections 3/4 Of The Dowry … vs In Re: Md. Majirul Hoque @ Sajirul … on 2 April, 2019

1

02.04.19

Sl. No.55
akd
[PARTLY
ALLOWED]
C. R. M. 3645 of 2019

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 28.03.2019 in connection with Manikchak Police Station Case No. 20
of 2019 dated 15.01.2019 under Sections 498A/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code read
with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. (G.R. Case No. 220 of 2019)

And

In Re: Md. Majirul Hoque @ Sajirul Hoque Ors.

… … Petitioners
Ms. Minoti Gomes .. Advocate
… … for the petitioners

Mr. Binay Kumar Panda .. Advocate
Mr. Subham Bhakat .. Advocate
… … for the State

Heard the learned advocate appearing for both the parties.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the victim housewife committed

suicide eight years after marriage.

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and

submits that the petitioner no.1-husband had tortured his wife and subsequently given an

undertaking not to indulge in further torture. He subsequently breached such undertaking

and tortured his wife again. As a result, the victim-housewife committed suicide.

We have considered the materials on record. We find prima facie materials

connecting the petitioner no.1-husband with the torture upon the victim-housewife who

committed suicide. Hence, we are not inclined in granting anticipatory bail to the

accused/petitioner no.1 herein.

2

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the accused/petitioner no.1

namely, (1) Md. Majirul Hoque @ Sajirul Hoque is rejected.

However, keeping in mind the extent of complicity of the petitioner nos.2, 3, 4,

5, 6 7 herein namely, the in-laws of the victim-housewife in the alleged crime, we are of

the opinion that custodial interrogation of the accused/petitioner nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6 7 is not

necessary in the facts of the present case and they may be granted anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the accused/petitioner nos. 2,

3, 4, 5, 6 7 namely (2) Jalil Sk., (3) Sonabhan Bibi, (4) Santana Khatun, (5) Sayela

Bibi @ Sayela Khatun, (6) Rekha Bibi (7) Ejajul @ Ejabul, be released on bail upon

furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each, with two sureties of like

amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also be subject to the

conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

and on further condition that they shall appear before the court below and pray for regular

bail within a fortnight from date.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Manojit Mandal, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

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