Pravinbhai Maldebhai Dangar vs State Of Gujarat

Gita Gopi, J

This application has been preferred under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR No.11213010230105/2023 registered with Dhoraji Police Station, Rajkot Rural for the offences punishable under sections 306, 498(A), 114 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Mr. Dagli, learned advocate for the applicant states that the applicant is brother-in-law (Nandoi) of the deceased who is a school teacher residing at Rajkot since October, 2021 and had joined the service at Rajkot on 9.8.2021 and after purchasing the property at Rajkot, he had been staying there. Mr. Dagli submitted that the allegation against the applicant is of harassing the deceased by way of demanding dowry of Rs.5 lacs. Mr. Dagli submitted that there is specific allegation of demanding money and the contents of the FIR alleges against the parents-in-law and the husband and the sister-in-law who is wife of the present applicant but no such specific instances are made out against the applicant, while he has been dragged in by way of general allegation of often demanding money and mentally harassing her.

While countering the arguments, Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, learned APP and Ms. Shivangi Vyas, learned advocate for the complainant submitted that there are about 10 videos retrieved from the mobile of the deceased where she has alleged of demand made by all the in-laws including the present applicant of Rs.5 lacs and stated that the complainant has moved this Court for cancellation of regular bail granted to the co-accused – mother-in-law and further states that the marriage span of the deceased was only one and a half year.

The FIR does not specify any of the incidences to state that the applicant was demanding any such alleged dowry money. The FIR joins the present applicant along with others in a general form of demanding money and often harassing the deceased. Reliance has been placed on the Panchnama of the mobile phone of the deceased which states that the mobile phone of the Samsung Company was opened with the password which was sent by the deceased to the complainant’s brother and in one of the video, the deceased has stated that the cause of her death is parents-in-law, sister-in-law and the present applicant – brother-in-law – Nandoi who had been demanding Rs.5 lacs and she has stated that since she could not pay the money, she has been harassed since last one year. The Panchnama also does not specify by way of contents of the videograph of any specific incident with time and date of any demand made by the present applicant from the deceased. It appears that as the applicant is related to the other accused, he has been joined in the complaint. Considering the facts of the case and the averments made in the FIR, discretion is exercised to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported at [2011] 1 SCC 694, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, reported at (1980) 2 SCC 565. This Court has also taken into consideration the recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State of (NCT of Delhi) and Another, reported in (2020) 5 SCC 01.

In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR No.11213010230105/2023 registered with Dhoraji Police Station, Rajkot Rural on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that the applicant:

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 15.7.2023 between 11.00 a.m. and 02.00 p.m.;

(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;

(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change his residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the concerned trial court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the concerned trial court within a week;

At the trial, the concerned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. Registry to communicate this order to the concerned Court/authority by Fax or Email forthwith.