[2025:RJ-JP:4172] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 801/2025 Barfi Devi W/o Dhaniram, Aged About 70 Years, R/o 99, Deedayal Nagar Colony Thana Mathuragate Bharatpur (Petitioner In Bharatpur Central Jail Sewar Since 16.12.2024) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Bardhar For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Navankur Dubey HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/01/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.1006/2024 registered at Police Station Mathuragate, District Bharatpur (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2), 85 & 61(2)(a) of BNS. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in the matter for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2), 85 & 61(2)(a) of BNS. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that there is no evidence available on record suggesting that soon-before death, deceased was harassed by the petitioner on account of demand of dowry. Counsel submits that cause of death is asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging. Counsel submits that except ligature mark, no other injury was found on [2025:RJ-JP:4172] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-801/2025] the person of the deceased. Counsel submits that petitioner is a female and aged about 70 years and in custody since 16.12.2024. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruit purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. They submit that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that she harassed the deceased on account of demand of dowry and within one year deceased died in her matrimonial home. They submit that independent witnesses who are neighbours of the petitioner specifically stated in their statement that petitioner had also harassed the deceased on account of demand of dowry. They submit that trial is at very initial stage and only charge-sheet has been filed, charges have not been framed. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and evidence available on record in the form of charge-sheet and role attributed to the petitioner, I do not find it a fit case to allow this bail application, at this stage. 5. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed. However, observations made herein are only decision of this bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /195