Sanjay v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: July 31, 2020 Sanjay

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI

Present:

Mr.Vikas Bali, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** ARCHANA PURI, J.

Case has been taken up for hearing through Video Conferencing.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.10 dated 07.01.2020 under Sections 304-B, 498-A and 406 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Narnaul, District Mahendergarh.

Notice of motion.

Ms.Gaganpreet Kaur, Asstt. Advocate General, Haryana, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. In consonance of the order dated 10.07.2020, report of learned

-2District and Sessions Judge, Narnaul, regarding status of the case before the trial Court has been received. The perusal of the same reveal about the challan to have been presented before concerned Magistrate on 16.03.2020 and the next date was 19.03.2020. Thereafter, due to complete lock down, the case was adjourned through Video Conferencing due to the restricted work as ordered by this Court. The case was further adjourned through VC only and the accused was produced before District Magistrate, Narnaul on 25.06.2020 and 09.07.2020. Thereafter, the case was adjourned to 23.07.2020. On the application filed by the learned counsel for the accusedpetitioner on 16.07.2020, the hearing of the case was preponed and case was committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge by the concerned Magistrate for 23.07.2020.

It is evident from the record that challan has been presented. As per learned State counsel, charge has yet not been framed against the petitioner.

The FIR in the present case has been registered at the instance of father of deceased. As per the accusations in the FIR, marriage of the victim was performed with the present petitioner on 07.05.2019 and she was maltreated and harassed by her in-laws for bringing less dowry. Besides the petitioner, who is husband of the deceased, even accusations were there against sister-in-law Rinku and mother-in-law Shakuntla, who were stated to have been found to be innocent and challan has only been presented against the petitioner.

The victim had died due to hanging after eight months of her marriage with the petitioner. Considering the fact that the death of victim had taken place, within a period of eight months of her marriage, otherwise

-3than under normal circumstances and also considering the relationship of the petitioner with the deceased and further also considering the initial stage of the case before the trial Court, at this stage, no case is made out for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

In view of the above discussion, the present petition stands dismissed.

July 31, 2020 (ARCHANA PURI) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No