Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 910 (HP)

Bhuri Singh v. State of H. P.

2014-07-16

RAJIV SHARMA, SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2014
JUDGMENT The son of the petitioner, namely, Vikas, was living along with his grand mother, uncle and the mother of Vikas at village Har, P.O. Talwar, District Kangra, H.P. On 28th February, 2013, said Vikas left home after lunch but did not return thereafter and got missing. The petitioner’s wife, along with relatives, carried out a search to locate but could not trace him anywhere. The dead body of Vikas was found on the next day i.e. on 1st March, 2013 at about 1:30 p.m., at, a very nearby place. The petitioner avers that he apprehends that his son was murdered, yet, the local police is bent upon to prove the same, as, a suicide and has not been carrying out the investigation in a fair and impartial manner. Even an F.I.R. has been averred to have not been registered. Ultimately, petitioner filed an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Palampur and on directions having been rendered by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Palampur, on the application, F.I.R. was came to be registered by the police on 11th June, 2013. It is further averred that even after registration of such F.I.R., the Investigating Agency, is, not conducting the investigation in proper perspective. The petitioner avers, that there is absolute indolence on the part of the police, investigating the case, as also, lack of will on its part to find out the real culprits, involved in the commission of the offence. Therefore, it is, prayed that this Court, direct that the investigation into the case be conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation. 2. The respondents filed a detailed reply, to, the writ petition, wherein, it has been contended, in denial to the averment of the petitioner, by the respondents, being lethargic, as well, as showing un-interestedness, in conducting the investigation, into the offence. Rather, it is contended that the investigation, into the case, has been carried out by the police and no clinching material or evidence came into existence to prove the case under Section 302 IPC and, as such, cancellation report, is, being prepared. It is contended that on, the dead body of the deceased, being recovered, the video-graphy and photography was carried out by respondent No.4 and statements of the witnesses were recorded at the spot. It is contended that on, the dead body of the deceased, being recovered, the video-graphy and photography was carried out by respondent No.4 and statements of the witnesses were recorded at the spot. The statement of the petitioner does not disclose any kind of suspicion on any person. The investigation of this case is stated to have been carried out fairly and honestly, as also, in accordance with law, by respondent No.4. During the investigation, it is stated to have come that the deceased was having affair with Shilpa, with whom he had a quarrel. The deceased is stated to have time and again pressurized Shilpa to marry him and to flee away with him and on her refusal, he was threatening to commit suicide. On 28.2.2013, also, the deceased had a quarrel with Shilpa on the issue of marriage with him to which proposal she refused. On her refusal, the deceased threatened her to commit suicide. One Tarun, the classmate and immediate neighbour of the deceased, is stated to have made a statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., during the investigation that he has given insecticide to the deceased, on his demand, as, he wanted to kill termite. The Medical Officer, who conducted the post mortem of the deceased, opined the duration of death and post mortem is 24-28 hours and no fatal injury was found on his person. The viscera of the accused, preserved by the medical officer, were sent for examination to the FSL, Dharamshala, who, after examination, opined that Organ phosphorus insecticide was detected in the contents of viscera. No evidence with regard to the forcible administration of the poison was found during the investigation. As such, after having investigated every aspect of the matter, the investigating officer came to the conclusion that it was a case of suicidal death. 3. Undisputedly, the FIR was registered in the police station on the direction, rendered by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, on the petitioner having come to approach the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class for registration of the FIR. After the registration of the FIR, the police started the investigation in the case. During the course of the investigation, the postmortem of the deceased was conducted by the Medical Officer and the police procured the post mortem report, comprised in Annexure R-12. The viscera, preserved by the Medical Officer, were sent for chemical examination by the police. After the registration of the FIR, the police started the investigation in the case. During the course of the investigation, the postmortem of the deceased was conducted by the Medical Officer and the police procured the post mortem report, comprised in Annexure R-12. The viscera, preserved by the Medical Officer, were sent for chemical examination by the police. Reports comprised in Annexure R-13 to Annexure R-16 were, also, procured by the police. The reports of the Medical Officer, as also the Chemical Examiners, comprised in Annexure R-12, Annexure R-14, Annexure R-15 and Annexure R-16, reflect the fact that the deceased died owing to consumption of organo phosphorus and, as also, the fact that no external injuries, showing the forcible administration of aforesaid poison to the deceased, were found. The Investigating Officer also took into possession the memory card and the cell phone of the deceased and sent for examination by the experts at Junga and Chandigarh and reports, comprised in Annexure R-10 and R-11, were procured. The experts opined that no voice recording could be retrieved from the said mobile phone. Statement of the petitioner, comprised in Annexure R-3, recorded by the police under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., also does not raise suspicion on any person. Annexure R-5, statement of Tarun, the Classmate of the accused, discloses the factum of the deceased having love affair with Shilpa and as also the fact that the deceased used to quarrel with Shipla over the issue of marriage with deceased, to which she was refusing. His statement also discloses that the deceased had taken insecticide from him on the pretext to kill termites. Statement of Shilpa, Annexure R-7, recorded by the police under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. also discloses the factum of the deceased pressurizing her to marry him and on her refusal he was threatening to commit suicide. As such, it appears that when the said contentions in the reply of the respondents, do satisfy the conscience of this Court, that hence, sincere efforts are being made by the Police and on such sincere efforts, the police, as also, when such efforts, do dispel the allegations of immense lethargy and indolence of the investigating agency, therefore, it being not a fit case for transfer of the investigation from the police to State CID or Central Bureau of Investigation. Concomitantly, when this Court, too, in the face of the reply, filed by the respondents, and, its not, divulging any lethargy or indolence of inactivity on the part of the respondents to conduct investigation. In nutshell, it constrains this Court, to conclude that there are no well merited and substantial grounds, made out by the petitioner, for ordering the investigation to be conducted by the State CID or the Central Bureau of Investigation. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed, so also, the pending application(s), if any.