Manjeet Jaiswal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No.4050 of 2020 • Manjeet Jaiswal S/o Late Gulabchand Jaiswal Aged About 32 Years R/o Pandri P.S. Raghunathnagar District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Sanjeev Kumar Verma, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Ravish Verma, GA Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 25/08/2020 Heard.

1.

The applicant has moved this application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.14/2020 registered at Police Station Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj for the offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC. The applicant was arrested on 17-03-2020.

2.

Case of the prosecution is that the applicant's wife died in suspicious circumstances and her dead body was found in the well. It is also the case of the prosecution that along with the dead body of wife of the applicant, applicant's two children were found dead and their dead bodies were also found in the same well.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecution has fabricated a case against the applicant. He would submit that earlier, offence under Section 306 of IPC was registered, but later on, certain statements were recorded and offence under Section 304-B of IPC has been registered. His

argument is that in the statement of father, mother and sister of the deceased, there is nothing to show that the applicant had harassed and subjected to cruelty, his wife on account of demand of dowry. It is submitted that marriage was solemnized in the year 2013 and thereafter, two children were born out of their wedlock, therefore, the allegation of demand of dowry and subjecting the deceased-wife to cruelty in connection with such demand in the year 2020, is wholly improbable.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application by submitting that the witnesses have stated regarding maltreatment and harassment meted out to the deceased-wife of the present applicant, as a result of such harassment and maltreatment, the wife of the present applicant died in suspicious circumstances along with her two children and their dead bodies were found in the well and according to the postmortem report, all of them died due to drowning.

5.

Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the parties, material reflected from the case diary and that the deceased is said to have died in suspicious circumstances along with her two children, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail.

6.

Accordingly, the application is rejected.

Certified copy as per rules.

SD/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Tumane