Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 93 (HP)

Yash Pal v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2015-02-06

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2015
JUDGMENT : Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. The petitioner has approached this Court for grant of the regular bail in case FIR No. 58/2014 registered at Police Station, Nalagarh, on 19.3.2014, under sections 306 and 498-A of Indian Penal Code. 2. In response to the notice issued by this Court, the respondent has produced the records of investigation and has also filed the status report. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. 4. It appears that on 19.3.2014, one Sh. Ravinder Kumar, reported that no issue was born out of the wed-lock of his sister and the petitioner, as a result, both of them adopted one Man Singh, younger brother, of the petitioner. He then alleged that his sister was subjected to cruelty by the petitioner when he would be under the influence of the liquor. In the month of January 2014, he along with his wife visited the house of the petitioner at Nalagarh where his sister disclosed to them the fact regarding maltreatment by the petitioner. It is further claimed that she also complained that the petitioner had illicit relation with a woman with whom he used to interact over the mobile phone during odd hours of the night. Later his sister came to his house and complained that the business of the petitioner was running in losses and, therefore, there is an urgent need of money. Therefore, the complainant and his two brothers gave Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner. On March 18, 2014, during night hours, the complainant came to know from Sh. Ashok Kumar that something had happened to his sister. The petitioner along with his brothers came to Nalagarh and found his sister dead with ligature marks around her neck. He alleged that his sister had committed suicide on account of cruelty meted out to her by the petitioner. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the FIR is an act of vengeance at the instance of the complainant. It is claimed that the petitioner was having a gold business at Nalagarh and the deceased was happily living with him except that she had mental stress on account of her being issueless. It is claimed that the petitioner was having a gold business at Nalagarh and the deceased was happily living with him except that she had mental stress on account of her being issueless. Their marriage had been solemnized on 18.3.2003 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs and because no child was born out of the wed-lock, the deceased used to remain under mental stress and utter frustration which continued for many years. On realising this condition, they had decided to adopt a son as this would relieve the deceased of the mental pressure and remove her loneliness. It is categorically argued that over a period of 14 years of marriage, there is not even a single complaint regarding harassment made to any person or authority. The deceased on account of the mental stress had committed suicide as she could no longer bear the stress. 6. I find substance in the submissions made by the petitioner because the records of the investigation do not support the claim of harassment, maltreatment or giving of the beatings at the instance of the petitioner. It is unfortunate that a young life has been lost but then it is not the petitioner who alone can be blamed for the same. This court need not delve into the issue any deeper lest it would cause prejudice to either of the parties. Suffice to say that this is a fit case where the discretion is to be exercised. 7. Accordingly, petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Nalagarh, District Solan. 8. The petitioner shall further abide by the following conditions: that he shall:- (a) regularly attend the trial court on each and every hearing if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; (b) not temper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; (c) not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; (d) not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 9. 9. It is clarified that if the petitioner misuse his liberty or violate any of the conditions imposed upon him, the Investigating Agency shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of the bail. Petition disposed of accordingly.