Judgment 1. Petition for bail. 2. Offences alleged under Section 498-A and 304-B of I.P.C. in Cr. No. 1974/2014. 3. Petitioner is A-2. 4. Jansirani is daughter of defacto complainant Rebakkal. Jansirani and Arun Kumar are lovers. Ultimately, their marriage took place. After marriage, difference of opinion arose between them. No love last between them. They were separated. Jansi came to her mother's house. Within six months of their marriage, matrimonial discordance took place between them. 5. Subsequently, a lawyer's notice, dated 10.12.2013 was issued by Arun to Jansi. On 11.11.2014, in her father's office, Jansi committed suicide. In this connection, a case of suspicious death has been registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. 6. In the course of investigation, section of law has been altered to Section 498-A and 304-B of I.P.C. 7. In this connection, Arun Kumar and his mother/petitioner/A-2 have been included in this case. 8. A-2 is in jail since 23.1.2015. Now, she seeks bail. 9. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Jansirani took a foolish decision. Petitioner and her son have been implicated as though she had committed suicide because of their dowry demand. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that even as per the prosecution version, there is no prima facie case for an offence under section 304-B of I.P.C. as against the petitioner. 10. Learned Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that the spouses are separated. Earlier, a complaint has been given to All Women Police station. It was enquired into and the parties have decided to go before a competent Civil Court. Under these circumstances, Jansi committed suicide. 11. I have anxiously considered the rival submissions and perused the case-diary. 12. Offence alleged is under section 304-B of I.P.C. It is a new type of offence. Originally, this offence is not in the Indian Penal Code. It is a deemed offence. Under certain circumstances if a married woman commits suicide, suffers unnatural death, within 7 years of her marriage, it will be deemed a dowry death under Section 304-B of I.P.C. 13. For an offence under Section 304-B of I.P.C. the most important aspect is that 'sooner before her death the victim should have been subjected to dowry torture'. The word torture is not defined in section 304-B of I.P.C. In such circumstances, 'dowry' as defined in Section 2 of Dowry Prohibition Act has to be referred to. For an offence under Section 304-B of I.P.C. the most important aspect is that 'sooner before her death the victim should have been subjected to dowry torture'. The word torture is not defined in section 304-B of I.P.C. In such circumstances, 'dowry' as defined in Section 2 of Dowry Prohibition Act has to be referred to. Continued harassment, physical or mental, any wilful conduct either towards wife or her relatives with the sole aim of getting dowry is also one form of cruelty. The word 'soon need not be restricted to 'immediate past' nor a 'remote past' but it must refer to 'a reasonable prior period' 14 'Dowry' is a worst form of social evil. It is a motiveless crime against women and womanhood. The source of the crime is one's greediness. It is widely practiced only in India. It does not exist not even in Africa. 15. Dowry arises during three stages. 'Before', 'during' and 'after' the marriage. In this respect, Section 2 to 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 can be referred to. An avaricious married man's wish for his wife's side money, material cannot be limited by passage of time. 16. Once it is established by the prosecution that 'soon before her death the victim has been subjected to dowry torture', thereafter it is duty of the accused to show that he is not guilty. Since in dowry torture cases, direct evidence is very rare, as this type of matrimonial violence mostly took place within four walls of matrimonial home, the Evidence Act, 1872 has been amended and section 113-B has been included. 17. Thus, the established principle of criminal law that the offence alleged against the accused must be proved beyond all reasonable doubts has been diluted, tinkered with to some extent. In this way, there is partial departure of common law system of Anglo-Saxonic criminal jurisprudence and partial importation of the continental system of French Criminal into Indian Criminal Law. 18. Now, in this case, love marriage has taken place between Arun and Jansi. Arun loved Jansi very much and not her property and money. Initially, their love was approved by Arun's family, but, opposed by the girl's family. Subsequently, the lovers were married in 2013. Subsequently, due to difference of opinion, they were separated. They have no issues, but have issues. 19. Arun loved Jansi very much and not her property and money. Initially, their love was approved by Arun's family, but, opposed by the girl's family. Subsequently, the lovers were married in 2013. Subsequently, due to difference of opinion, they were separated. They have no issues, but have issues. 19. At the time when Jansi committed suicide, she was under the care and custody of her parents. For some reason, they have put her in an hostel. Separation between the spouses is for more than a year. During this period, they have gone to All Women Police Station. Petitioner has no access to her during this period. Now, there is paucity of material to show that prior to her committing suicide, Jansi was subjected to dowry torture by her husband and by her mother-in-law/petitioner. 20. Jansi might have committed suicide due to frustration, due to their separation. She might have died due to their ego. She might have died due to their misunderstanding. 21. Prima facie there is no strong, concrete materials to show that there were continuous dowry torture and only because of that she had taken the extreme step. 22. In view of the foregoings, there is prima facie case in favour of the petitioner. Further, petitioner is in jail for a considerable period. Further, R.D.O. enquiry is also over. Further, statement of victim's mother, their relatives and other key witnesses have been recorded. In the circumstances, petitioner cannot interfere with investigation. Further, it is quite unlikely that she will flee away from justice. 23. Cumulatively considering those aspects, I am of the considered view that she could be granted bail. 24. I hasten to add that the above decision has been taken only for the 'limited purpose' of considering the existence of a prima facie case for considering the petitioner's bail plea. 25. Ordered as under: (i) Bail granted; (ii) Two sureties and the petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai. (iii) Petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Monday and Friday at 10.30 a.m. for three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.