SHRI DEVI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(2.) It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the present petitioner Smt. Shri Devi, who is the wife of deceased, has been implicated on the basis of the statement of Deva Ram, who is said to be brother in law of the accused petitioner and younger brother of the deceased. In the first statement recorded Under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 31.8.08, he stated that the deceased died on account of head injury inflicted due to fall and head having been collided with the T.V. table. In this statement, he has not implicated the present accused petitioner but after six months of the incident, he changed his statement and said that due to injuries inflicted by the present accused petitioner, his brother died. This statement is also recorded Under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Now, the chargesheet has been filed. It is argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the deceased was drunkard and this fact has been corroborated in the FSL Report also.

(3.) On the contrary, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application stating that a stick has been recovered from the accused petitioner in pursuance to the information furnished by her Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Therefore, the bail to the accused petitioner should not be granted.