IMPORTANT POINT
The court granted bail to the applicant, considering the circumstances surrounding the engagement and subsequent allegations, emphasizing that observations in the order would not influence the trial.

JUDGMENT :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No. 435 of 2023, under section 376 (2) (n), 120B, 406, 417, 420 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Kotwali Ranipur, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, the family members of the applicant approached the family members of the informant for her marriage with the applicant. Initially, the family members of the informant were reluctant, but subsequently, they agreed to it. Some pre-wedding ceremony was also done. On 06.06.2023, the engagement was performed. The FIR records that for various reasons, for securing his own service or for securing the service of the informant, the applicant demanded a lot of money from the family members of the informant, which they gave him. After engagement, the applicant took the informant at various places and established physical relations with her. Subsequently, they demanded Rs.50 Lakh before marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that, in fact, the engagement of the applicant and the informant had already been done on 06.06.2023, but thereafter, some criminal case was lodged against the applicant. Therefore, the father of the applicant committed suicide and the informant and her family members declined to continue with the marriage proposal and demanded all the money, which they had spent on pre-wedding ceremonies, including engagement. Thereafter, the FIR has been lodged. He would submit that the bank statement reveals that about Rs.35 Lakh were transferred from the account of the applicant to the account of the informant’s family members. Whereas, about Rs.32 Lakh were transferred by the informant’s family members in the account of the applicant.

5. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that, in fact the applicant had cheated the informant and her family members. He sold every household article of the informant, including her two-wheeler or four-wheeler car by preparing forged documents. He would submit that in the name of property also, the applicant cheated and informant and her family members. He admits that about Rs.34 lakh were transferred from the account of the applicant to the accounts of the informant’s family members and about Rs.32 Lakh were transferred from the informant’s family members account to the account of the applicant. But, he would submit that the amount which the applicant transferred in the account of informant’s family member was the money, which the applicant procured by deceitful means.

6. Learned State counsel would submit that the according to the FIR, the victim and her parents have supported the prosecution case.

7. It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial or in any other proceedings.

8. It is admitted that after engagement, a criminal case was lodged against the applicant. Thereafter, the marriage proposal was cancelled. Admittedly, the engagement of the applicant and the victim was to be performed on 06.06.2023.

9. Having considered this and other attending factors, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

10. The bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.