Criminal Application No. 3652 of 2009 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Advocate Shri Chitlange drew my attention to paragraphs 41 and 42 of the judgment of the trial court. In paragraph 41 the court has come to the conclusion that there was no harassment or cruelty in connection with dowry demand soon before the death…
Judgment
Heard Shri N.L.Chitlange Advocate for the applicant and Smt.B.R.Khekale APP for Respondent-State.
Present applicants who are original accused Nos. 1 to 3 are held guilty by learned Additional Sessions Judge1, Jalna, for offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 read with 34 of I.P.C. in Sessions case No.118 of 2008 decided on 12.1.2009.
Originally, in all seven accused faced trial. All of them are acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 304-B r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,
1961. 2
Advocate Shri Chitlange drew my attention to paragraphs 41 and 42 of the judgment of the trial court. In paragraph 41 the court has come to the conclusion that there was no harassment or cruelty in connection with dowry demand soon before the death of the victim whereas in paragraph 42, the learned Judge has held that there was harassment and cruelty for non fulfillment of demand of Rs.30,000/=.
Advocate Shri Chitlange also referred to visit of Manik (father of deceased Shaila) to the house of Shaila and her in-laws of Shaila. Manik had requested the husband of deceased Shaila and her in laws to send her with him, but the request was refused. On the day of visit, father of deceased slept at her house and on the next day he went back to Jalna. On the day he came back to Jalna, at about 8.30 p.m. applicant Nos.1 to 3 and others came to the parents of Shaila and enquired whether Shaila had come to their house 3 but Shaila was not with her parents. The applicants and others, therefore, went to the police station.
The learned A.P.P. has taken me through the statements of PW-3 Manik, PW-4 Padmabai and PW-5 Nisha. On perusal of the judgment and evidence on record, this appears to be a case wherein accused may be released on bail.
Hence, pending appeal, substantive sentence is suspended and each of the applicants is directed to be released on bail of Rs.20,000/= with surety in the like amount.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.