HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated Nainital the 18th September, 2008 First Bail Application No. 372 2008 Order on the bail application of the accused. Ramesh Singh ……..… Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ……..… Opposite Party _____________________________________________________________ Case Crime No. 1 of 2008 U/s 498-A and 304-B I.P.C. Patwari Circle Budhana Tehsil Jakholi, District – Rudraprayag Hon’ble J. C. S. Rawat, J. Heard Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the applicant; Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for the respondent/State; and perused the record. Learned counsel for the accused/applicant contended that the F.I.R. did not disclose the main ingredients of section 304-B r/w 113-B I.P.C. that cruelty was committed soon before the death in connection with the demand of dowry; nowhere in the F.I.R. it has been stated that there was any demand of dowry by the accused/applicant; merely the fact of asking Rs. 1 lac as her daughter being ill and she had no child cannot be inferred to be a demand of dowry; the statement of Bachan Singh did not disclose that any demand of dowry was made; Rs. 1 lac which was demanded for running a business by unemployed person does not express the demand of dowry. It was further contended that for the first time, the mother Kabotari Devi on 16/03/2008 has stated that the accused/applicant used to commit cruelty in connection with the demand of dowry; the statement was recorded after 12 days after due consultation; and there is no evidence of 304-B I.P.C. in this case. It was further contended that the deceased committed the suicide by hanging herself and the medical report further reveals that the death was caused due to asphyxia. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; contentions of the learned counsel for the parties; counter affidavit filed by the respondent; the statement annexed with the counter affidavit; and the document filed by the accused/applicant, I find that it is a fit case for bail. Let the accused/applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) Dated 18.09.2008 Shiv