Devarampally Rajini v. The State Of Telangana
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.3013 OF 2019 ORDER:
This is an application filed under Sections 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking enlargement of petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest.
2.
The petitioner A4 in Crime No.239 of 20l9 of Police Station, RGI Airport, Ranga Reddy district registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B read with Section 34 IPC. 3.
According to the prosecution case, on 19.5.2019 at 3:00 hours, the defacto complainant lodged a written complaint in English, in which he stated that his daughter Akshita marriage was performed with A1-Raghavender Reddy. At the time of marriage and as per the demand of A1 and his family members, the defacto complainant had given a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as dowry and after 10 days of marriage, the family members of A1-Raghavender Reddy along with his friends Mahender and Raghuvardhan Reddy started his daughter both mentally and physically by demanding additional dowry. On 18.5.2019 at 8 p.m. his daughter died and one Buchi Reddy informed the complainant that his daughter Akshita hanged herself and committed suicide. In the said written complaint, it was also stated that on the date of occurrence at about 7.30 p.m.
, his daughter informed to his wife on cell phone that her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, her elder sister-in-law and friends Mahender and Raghuvardhan Reddy demanded her to bring additional dowry of Rs.10,00,000/- or else they will kill her. Thus, he requested the Police to take action against the accused.
report, a case in Crime No.239 of 2019 was registered against the Accused under Sections 304-B read with 34 IPC of RGI Airport Police Station.
4.
It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that A4 is the elder sister of A1 and married much prior to the marriage of A1 with deceased. It is stated that the husband of petitioner/A4 expired very recently and she is blessed with three children and living at her in-laws place and that she never used to attend or visit the house of A1 and deceased except on the festivals or very occasionally to visit her parents now and then and that she is nothing to do with the allegations made in the complaint and the petitioner never demanded nor harassed the deceased mentally or physically as alleged by the defacto complainant in his complaint. It is further stated that almost all material witnesses in this case were already examined and most of the investigation is completed and only formal charge sheet has to be filed by the police and that false and baseless allegations are leveled against the petitioner without any prima facie material on record. 5.
On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for defactocomplainant as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the application.
6.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for defacto-complainant.
7.
A perusal of the record discloses that the death of the deceased was occurred in the matrimonial house in unnatural circumstances. Thus, taking into consideration the gravity of nature of allegations
leveled against the petitioner and also having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner/A4 on anticipatory bail.
7.
Therefore, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner/A4 appears and surrenders before the Court below within ten (10) days and moves an application for grant of bail, the same shall be decided by the Court below on merits and in accordance with law, on the same day. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ G.SRI DEVI, J Date: 18.6.2019 DA
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.3013 OF 2019 18.6.2019 DA