SwadhIn Vs. State of Haryana - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1140134
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnMay-14-2014
AppellantSwadhin
RespondentState of Haryana
Excerpt:
crm-m-15662 of 2014 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana, at chandigarh crm-m-15662 of 2014 decided on : 14.05.2014 swadhin ..petitioner versus state of haryana ..respondents coram : hon'ble mr.justice tejinder singh dhindsa present : mr.naresh kumar joshi, advocate and ms.silvy gupta, advocate for the petitioner. mr.vikas malik, aag, haryana. tejinder singh dhindsa, j. (oral) petitioner has filed the present petition under section 439 of the code of criminal procedure (for short -'cr.p.c.) seeking benefit of regular bail pending trial in fir no.284, dated 01.09.2013, under section 306 of the indian penal code (for short-'ipc').registered at police station bawani khera, district bhiwani. initially, fir was registered for the offence under sections 323, 306, 511, 498-a, 34, ipc on the statement of asha devi wife the present petitioner. as per her statement, her husband was a habitual consumer of liquor and used to doubt her character. that apart, allegations were against the mother-in-law and father-in-law as regards insufficient dowry having been given at the time of marriage. asha devi futher in her statement on 01.09.2013 has stated that on account of such harassment at the hands of her husband as also of mother-in-law and father-in-law, she has consumed the pesticide spray kumar sudhir 2014.05.15 16:17 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crm-m-15662 of 2014 2 so as to end her life. undisputedly, during the cours.of investigation, statement of asha devi was recorded under section 164, cr.p.c.on 09.09.2013. such statement has been read over by learned counsel for the petitioner in the court, today in which, she has changed her version to the effect that she has been administered poison by five persons i.e.her husband (present petitioner).mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law (jeth and jethani).asha devi, subsequently, died on 13.09.2013. it has also gone un- rebutted that during the cours.of investigation, offence under section 511, 323, 498-a, were deleted and the co-accused namely, karambir, father-in-law, banaspati, mother-in-law of the deceased were found to be innocent and were got discharged. investigation in the present case is complete and the challan has been presented on 16.11.2013. learned state counsel concedes that even of today, case has not been committed to the court of session. suffice it to observe that in a case of alleged abetment of suicide, there has to be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. it would require an active act or direct act which in turn has led to the deceased to commit suicide, seeing no other option. reference in this regard may be made to the decision of hon'ble supreme court in case chitresh kumar chopra versus state (government of nct of delhi) 2009(4) rcr (criminal).196. issue as to whether offence under section 306, ipc would be made out against the present petitioner, would be a moot point to be adjudicated upon during the cours.of trial. in totality of the circumstances, this court is of the considered kumar sudhir 2014.05.15 16:17 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crm-m-15662 of 2014 3 view that the petitioner is entitled to concession of regular bail. petition is allowed. bail to the satisfaction of the chief judicial magistrate/ilaqa magistrate, bhiwani. disposed of. [ tejinder singh dhindsa].judge 14.05.2014 sd kumar sudhir 2014.05.15 16:17 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
Judgment:

CRM-M-15662 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-15662 of 2014 Decided on : 14.05.2014 Swadhin ..Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA Present : Mr.Naresh Kumar Joshi, Advocate and Ms.Silvy Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana.

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.

(Oral) Petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short -'Cr.P.C.) seeking benefit of regular bail pending trial in FIR No.284, dated 01.09.2013, under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short-'IPC').registered at Police Station Bawani Khera, District Bhiwani.

Initially, FIR was registered for the offence under Sections 323, 306, 511, 498-A, 34, IPC on the statement of Asha Devi wife the present petitioner.

As per her statement, her husband was a habitual consumer of liquor and used to doubt her character.

That apart, allegations were against the mother-in-law and father-in-law as regards insufficient dowry having been given at the time of marriage.

Asha Devi futher in her statement on 01.09.2013 has stated that on account of such harassment at the hands of her husband as also of mother-in-law and father-in-law, she has consumed the pesticide spray Kumar Sudhir 2014.05.15 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh CRM-M-15662 of 2014 2 so as to end her life.

Undisputedly, during the couRs.of investigation, statement of Asha Devi was recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C.on 09.09.2013.

Such statement has been read over by learned counsel for the petitioner in the Court, today in which, she has changed her version to the effect that she has been administered poison by five persons i.e.her husband (present petitioner).mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law (Jeth and Jethani).Asha Devi, subsequently, died on 13.09.2013.

It has also gone un- rebutted that during the couRs.of investigation, offence under Section 511, 323, 498-A, were deleted and the co-accused namely, Karambir, father-in-law, Banaspati, mother-in-law of the deceased were found to be innocent and were got discharged.

Investigation in the present case is complete and the challan has been presented on 16.11.2013.

Learned State counsel concedes that even of today, case has not been committed to the court of Session.

Suffice it to observe that in a case of alleged abetment of suicide, there has to be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide.

It would require an active act or direct act which in turn has led to the deceased to commit suicide, seeing no other option.

Reference in this regard may be made to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Chitresh Kumar Chopra versus State (Government of NCT of Delhi) 2009(4) RCR (Criminal).196.

Issue as to whether offence under Section 306, IPC would be made out against the present petitioner, would be a moot point to be adjudicated upon during the couRs.of trial.

In totality of the circumstances, this Court is of the considered Kumar Sudhir 2014.05.15 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh CRM-M-15662 of 2014 3 view that the petitioner is entitled to concession of regular bail.

Petition is allowed.

Bail to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Ilaqa Magistrate, Bhiwani.

Disposed of.

[ Tejinder Singh Dhindsa].Judge 14.05.2014 sd Kumar Sudhir 2014.05.15 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh