Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 117 (HP)

Kirpal Singh v. State of H. P.

2012-03-21

KULDIP SINGH

body2012
JUDGMENT : Kuldip Singh, Judge 1. This is an application, u/s 439 Cr.P.C., for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No. 88/2011 dated 19.9.2011 registered at Police Station, Gagret, under sections 498-A, 306 IPC. It has been stated in the application that marriage of the petitioner with deceased Vinod Kumari was solemnized in the year 2003 and from the wedlock two sons were born, who are 7 and 4 years of age. The petitioner went abroad for earning his livelihood in December 2009 and returned to India in January 2011. The petitioner and deceased lived together peacefully. On 18.9.2011, Vinod Kumari wife of the petitioner consumed some poisonous substance. The petitioner took her to hospital but she could not be saved. The cremation was attended by the relatives including the father of the deceased. Later on at the instance of some inimical interested persons, the father of the deceased Puran Chand made a false complaint to the police alleging that his daughter was tortured on account of dowry by the petitioner. 2. The allegations of dowry against the petitioner are false. The petitioner had been taking care of the deceased and children, even LIC policy was taken by the petitioner in the name of deceased. The petitioner had been sending money to the deceased through her bank account when the petitioner was abroad. 3. The petitioner was arrested on 18.9.2011 and since then he is in custody. The investigation in the case is complete. The challan has been presented in the court. The continuous detention of the petitioner is not necessary. The children of the petitioner are being looked after by the old aged father of the petitioner, who is 72 years of age. There is no other person except old father of the petitioner to take care of the children. The petitioner earlier filed bail application, which has been dismissed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Una on 7.3.2012. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this Court and prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 4. The status report has been filed. The petitioner earlier filed bail application, which has been dismissed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Una on 7.3.2012. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this Court and prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 4. The status report has been filed. It has been stated that case has been registered on the statement of Puran Chand father of the deceased, u/s 154 Cr.P.C. He has stated that Vinod Kumari was married on 17.4.2003 with Kirpal Singh and from the wedlock, two sons were born to Vinod Kmari. After about two years of marriage, deceased started complaining to complainant and his wife that petitioner had been beating her for bringing less dowry. It was alleged that petitioner was in the habit of consuming excessive liquor and giving beating to the deceased. The complainant advised the deceased to stay with her in-laws. In order to maintain the dignity of the family the complainant did not disclose the ill-treatment of petitioner to deceased to his relatives nor he reported the matter to the police or panchayat. 5. It is alleged that about 15 days ago, deceased Vinod Kumari had told the complainant that she was given beatings by the petitioner and now it was not possible for her to tolerate more. The deceased asked the complainant to help her in dissolving the marriage. The complainant asked the deceased to come to her paternal home. The deceased Vinod Kumari came at about 9.00 p.m. on that date and stayed for two -three days with the complainant. The complainant during this period advised the deceased to settle at her matrimonial home and brought the deceased back to her matrimonial home. The complainant talked to Makholi Ram father of the petitioner, who told that his son (petitioner) was out of his control. The complainant next day returned to his home. 6. On 18.9.2011, the complainant received a telephonic message from Police Post, Daulatpur that Vinod Kumari had consumed some poison and she had been taken to Ludhiana hospital. In the evening at about 7.30 p.m, son of Tulsi informed the complainant on telephone that his daughter Vinod Kumari had died while on way to Ludhiana. The complainant was all alone, therefore, he could not report the matter on 18.9.2011. In the evening at about 7.30 p.m, son of Tulsi informed the complainant on telephone that his daughter Vinod Kumari had died while on way to Ludhiana. The complainant was all alone, therefore, he could not report the matter on 18.9.2011. The complainant has stated that petitioner compelled deceased Vinod Kumari to take some poisonous substance to end her life. On this case has been registered. 7. It has been stated that petitioner was arrested. As per report of Chemical Examiner organochloro insecticide was detected in the contents of exhibits P-1, P-2, P-3. The deceased died due to organochloro insecticide poisoning. The challan has been submitted in the court and is fixed on 26.3.2012 for consideration of charge before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Una. The submission has been made for rejecting the bail application. 8. Heard and perused the record. The deceased and petitioner were married on 17.4.2003. Two sons were born to deceased from the wedlock. The petitioner went abroad in December 2009 for earning his livelihood and returned India in January 2011. The petitioner has alleged that during this period he had been sending money to petitioner through bank. The petitioner, deceased and their children were happily living. It has been submitted that petitioner took the deceased to hospital at Ludhiana when she consumed some poisonous substance. The cremation of deceased was attended by the relatives including the father of the deceased, but later on, on some instigation the case was got registered by the father of the deceased. 9. The prosecution has not pointed out any previous complaint of the deceased or complainant to the lawful authority regarding beatings to deceased and demand of dowry of the petitioner. The deceased has not left behind any writing or note. The petitioner was arrested on 19.9.2011 and since then he is in custody. The investigation in the case is complete and challan has been submitted in the court. In the status report, nothing has been stated that in case petitioner is released on bail, he will terrorise, overawe the prosecution witnesses. The charge has not been framed as yet. Therefore, it is not possible to say how much time trial will take. In these circumstances, no purpose will be served to detain the petitioner in custody for indefinite period. The petitioner is in custody already for the last about six months. The charge has not been framed as yet. Therefore, it is not possible to say how much time trial will take. In these circumstances, no purpose will be served to detain the petitioner in custody for indefinite period. The petitioner is in custody already for the last about six months. The petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail u/s 439 Cr.P.C. 10. In view of above, the petition is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 88/2011 dated 19.9.2011 registered at Police Station, Gagret, under sections 498-A, 306 IPC, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No. 2, Amb, District Una with the conditions that petitioner shall not overawe, terrorise the prosecution witnesses and shall maintain absolute peace and lawful conduct during the pendency of the case. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion over the merits of the case. The application stands disposed of.