IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 23rd day of December 2009 Ist Bail Application No.1027 of 2009 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Sachin ..….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: December 23, 2009 ____________________________________________________________________ Arising out of FIR No.228/2009 Under Sections 304-B/506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar ________________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Addl. GA for the State and also perused the record. In brief the prosecution story is that on 7.5.2009 at 08:30 PM complainant Anu Devi lodged a report at Kotwali Kashipur with the allegations that the applicant-accused has committed murder of her sister Priya (deceased) for not fulfilling the demand of dowry. It is alleged in the FIR that the applicant-accused was demanding Rs.5 Lacs in dowry from the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the marriage between the applicant-accused and the deceased was a love marriage in which there was no exchange of dowry and the applicant has been falsely implicated in the said case. On the other hand, learned Addl. GA has stated that Smt. Priya (deceased) has died in the house of the present applicant-accused within eight months of the marriage i.e. within seven years’ of the marriage and after the marriage the present applicant-accused used to torture her for the demand of dowry. Further the deceased had died in unnatural circumstances in the house of the present applicant/accused. It is stated that it is a case of dowry death and the accused who is the husband of the deceased is responsible for the death. After considering all the facts and circumstances; on hearing learned counsel for the parties; on perusal of the contents of FIR and the fact that the deceased has died in unnatural circumstances within eight months of the marriage in the house of the applicant and soon before her death she was mentally harassed by the applicant for the demand of dowry, this Court is of the view that the present applicant does not deserve bail at this stage. The bail application is accordingly rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 23.12.2009 RG