Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Joginder Singh And Anr vs Union Territory Of J&K And Another on 16 July, 2022
Author: Vinod Chatterji Koul
Bench: Vinod Chatterji Koul
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU, KASHMIRAND LADAKH
ATJAMMU
Reserved on : 07.07.2022
Pronounced on: 16 .07.2022
Bail App No. 234/2022
c/w
Bail App No. 198/2022
1. Joginder Singh and anr
2. Beer Singh .....Applicant(s)
Through:- Mr. A. P. Singh, Advocate
v/s
Union Territory of J&K and another .....Respondent(s)
Through:- Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG
Coram:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE
ORDER
1. Through the medium of the instant applications, applicants seek bail in FIR No. 87/2020, registered with the Police Station, Bari Brahmana, for offences punishable under Sections 304-B/498-A IPC.
2. Co-accused-Geeta Devi has been granted interim bail in the FIR in question by this Court vide order dated 22.06.2022.
3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present bail applications, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:-
4. On 03.05.2022, complainant-Dhurv Singh lodged a written complaint before the Police Station, Bari Brahmana, alleging therein that his daughter-Arti Charak (deceased) was married to Pashotam Singh who along with other accused, namely, Geeta Devi (mother-in-law of deceased), Romi (brother-in-law of deceased), Rekha Charak (sister-in-law of deceased) and Kaka (husband of Rekha Charak) were harassing the deceased after 2 Bail App 234/2022 & 198/2022 marriage from the very beginning. All the accused were demanding huge dowry from the deceased and also used bad language in a cruel manner. In the complaint it was alleged that deceased came to her parental home and narrated the whole story to all family members. They tried to convince her and called her in-laws to solve the matter, but they refused all things. On 02.04.2022, accused-Parshotam Singh, threatened her on phone in the morning and in the evening, deceased -Arti Charak hanged herself. She was shifted to Medical College, Jammu, where she died.
5. On the basis of the aforesaid written complaint, FIR No. 87/2022 came to be registered at Police Station, Bari Brahmana for offences punishable under Sections 304/498-A IPC and investigation commenced. During investigation it came to fore that after marriage of deceased-Arti Charak all the accused named in the complaint were harassing her on account of demand of dowry.
6. Objections as well as latest status report have been filed.
7. A perusal of the status report reveals that as per the statement of the witnesses under Section 164 and 161 Cr.P.C offences under Section 304- B and 498-A IPC stands deleted and offences under Section 306 IPC have been added against the accused persons, namely, Parshotam Singh, Beer Singh, Geeta Devi, Joginder Singh and Rekha Charak, as none of the witness has supported the statement of the complainant regarding Dowry.
8. A perusal of the record further tends to show that applicants earlier moved an application for grant of bail under Section 437 Cr.P.C before Principal Sessions Judge, Samba, however, the same was dismissed with the observation that accused/applicants herein have failed to make out a case for grant of bail in their favour.
3
Bail App 234/2022 & 198/2022
9. Mr. Ravinder Gupta, learned AAG appearing on behalf of the official respondent submits that accused/applicants herein, namely, Joginder Singh, Rekha Charak and Beer Singh have been arrested and lodged in District Jail, Kathua on judicial remand. It is stated that Challan against, Beer Singh, Geeta Devi, Joginder Singh, and Rekha Charak has been produced before the Trial Court at Samba on 30.06.2022. 1o. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
11. In the instant case, initially FIR in question was registered for the offences under Sections 304-B/498-A IPC, they were taken into custody. They moved to the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Samba for grant of bail, however, the same was rejected. As per the statement of the witnesses under Section 164 and 161 Cr.P.C offences under 304-B/498-A IPC stands deleted and now offence under Section 306 IPC has been added in the instant case. Charge sheet is also stated to have been filed before the Trial Court.
12. The fact that a person commits suicide and previous to that he was assaulted by someone may not automatically lead to a conclusion that they had abetted the commission of suicide. It depends on the mental state of the person who committed suicide. For committing an abetment, the person must do something more than merely assaulting him and to hold whether there was abetment or not depends upon the evidence produced.
13. In Randhir Singh and another Vs State of Punjab, reported in 2004(13) SCC 129, the Apex Court in paragraph 12 held thus: 4
Bail App 234/2022 & 198/2022 "12 Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. In cases of conspiracy also it would involve that mental process of entering into conspiracy for the doing of that thing. More active role which can be described as instigating or aiding the doing of a thing it required before a parson can be said to be abetting the commission of offence under Section 306 of IPC."
14. Similarly, in Rajesh v. State of Haryana [2019 SCC On Line SC 44], the Supreme Court held as follows:
"9. Conviction Under Section 306 Indian Penal Code is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the Accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 306 Indian Penal Code, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Therefore, the act of abetment by the person charged with the said offence must be proved and established by the prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 Indian Penal Code."
15. In the present case, FIR has been lodged on the allegations of demand of dowry and physical abuse with reference to the statement of the father of the deceased-Arti Charak, under Sections 304-B/498-A IPC, however, during investigation and after recording the statements of the witnesses under Sections 164 and 161 Cr.P.C offences under Section 304- 5 Bail App 234/2022 & 198/2022 B/498-A IPC stands deleted and offence punishable under Section 306 IPC has been added. Charge sheet is also stated to have been filed against the applicants herein before the Trial Court at Samba. Merely demand of dowry can be a circumstance in the case of offence under Section 306 IPC, but not conclusive. The prosecution is required to show that the accused/applicants herein have abetted/instigated the deceased-Arti Charak to commit such offence and to prove that the conduct of the accused/applicants herein was willful and of such a nature, which was likely to derive the deceased-Arti Charak to commit suicide.
16. Having regard to the contents of the bail applications coupled with the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, a ground for grant of bail in favour of the applicants is made out at this stage, which is, accordingly, granted in case they furnish personal bond to the tune of Rs. One lakh as well as surety bond of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Principal Sessions Judge, Samba, who in turn shall forward the same to the investigating officer on the following terms and conditions:-
1. They shall appear before this Trial Court on every date of hearing.
2. They shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission.
3. They shall not influence directly or indirectly the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence by any manner mode or method.
17. The bail applications are, accordingly, disposed of.
A cop[y of this order be provided to learned counsel for the applicants under the seal and signature of Bench Secretary.
(VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL) JUDGE Jammu 16.07.2022 Bir 6 Bail App 234/2022 & 198/2022 Whether approved for reporting? Yes/No