IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Criminal I Bail Application No.829 of 2009 Order on the Bail application of accused CRIMINAL SIDE Manoj Kumar S/o Bacchu Mistri, R/o Village Ojali, P.S. Pauri, District Pauri ……….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------- Opposite party ________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.735 of 2009, U/s 304-B IPC & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Pauri, Distt. Pauri Dated: March 30, 2010 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri R.P. Nautiyal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Addl. GA for the State. In brief the prosecution case is that the marriage of complainant’s daughter Rekha was solemnized with the applicant on 03.10.2008 and soon after the marriage, the applicant along which co-accused started demanding an Rs.2.00 lacs in dowry from the victim. When the demand was not fulfilled, complainant’s daughter Rekha was subjected to physical and mental harassment just before her death and ultimately, due to the physical and mental cruelty, the victim Rekha consumed poison and ultimately she had died on 20.5.2009. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated. Contrary to this, learned Addl. GA submitted that as per the averments made in the FIR, the deceased was subjected to physical and mental cruelty just before her death due to demand of Rs.2.00 lacs in dowry and she has died just within seven months of the marriage. In the post-mortem report of the deceased, cause of death could not be ascertained and Viscera was preserved and in the Viscera report (annexed along with the supplementary affidavit of State), it was found that the poison consumed by the deceased as “NUVAN” insecticide. He further submitted that the averments made in the FIR also gets corroboration from the statements of the witnesses recorded by the I.O. u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of Km. Surekha, Smt. Kalpeshwari Devi and Badrish Kumar (annexure CA2 to the counter affidavit). After considering the above-said facts and circumstances, on hearing learned counsel for the parties, contents of the FIR and other papers available on record particularly the Viscera report of deceased in which the poison consumed by her was “NUVAN” insecticide and the statements of witnesses recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of Surekha, Kalpeshwari Devi and Badrish Kumar, it is not a fit case where the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is liable to be rejected and is accordingly rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 30.03.2010 Rajeev Dang