Hem Raj. vs State of H.P.

Kuldip Singh, J.—This judgment shall disposed of Cr. M.P. (M) Nos. 773, 774 and 775 of 2011, all having arisen out of FIR No. 225 of 2011, registered at Police Station, Sadar, Chamba, on 09.09.2011 u/s 306, 34 Indian Penal Code. The status report filed in Cr. M.P. (M) No. 773 of 2011 which has been perused. Hem Raj is the father-in-law, Hem Lata mother-in-law and Ravinder Kumar husband of the deceased Kavita.

The Petitioners have stated that Kavita (Sheetal Thakur) was found dead on 09.09.2011 in Room No. 101 of Hotel ''Jimmy'',Bus-stand, Chamba. Kavita got married with Ravinder on 17.07.2011. Kavita never disclosed before her marriage that she was already married with one Sudhir Kumar, having two children.

Sudhir Kumar lodged a complaint and pursuant to that warrants were issued u/s 97 Code of Criminal Procedure. and then it was revealed that Kavita was already married. Ravinder Kumar, deceased Kavita and Sudhir Kumar appeared before Sub Divisional Magistrate,Chamba, on 08.09.2011, who passed the order directing the police to hand over the deceased Kavita alias Sheetal to her parents at village Drabla. It has been alleged that police did not hand over the deceased Kavita to her parents and on the next date, Kavita committed suicide. The Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. They are innocent, they are ready to join the investigation and furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of the Court. The prayer has been made for releasing the Petitioners on bail.

The bail applications have been opposed by learned Additional Advocate General on the basis of the status report. It has been stated that case has been registered on the complaint of Tek Chand, Manager, Hotel ''Jimmy'', Bus-stand, Chamba, on 09.09.2011. It has been stated that the door of Room No. 101 where the deceased was staying was broke open. The dead body of the deceased was lying on the floor and on the bed there was a bottle of Sulfas and a copy. The pagination of the copy was done and on pages 66, 68 and 69, deceased Kavita had written her suicide note, but below the writing she had not put her signatures or written her name. On page No. 68, she has named Sudhir. It has also been alleged that family members of Ravinder asked her to divorce their son, otherwise they would poison her. Her jewellery has also been kept by them. They had placed some medicine and asked her to consume that medicine and under compulsion, she had consumed the medicine.

It has been stated in the status report that Kavita married with Sudhir about 21-22 years ago and had two sons, Rohit 18 years and Mohit 16 years. Kavita left her matrimonial house about two months ago, her husband had lodged missing report on 24.07.2011 at Police Station, Chamba. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chamba, had issued warrants u/s 97 Code of Criminal Procedure. The deceased Kavita was recovered from the house of Ravinder Kumar and she was produced before Sub Divisional Magistrate,Chamba, on 08.09.2011. Kavita before Sub Divisional Magistrate stated that she wanted to go to her parents.

It has also come in the investigation that Kavita got married with Ravinder Kumar. Sudhir Kumar and Ravinder Kumar were not interested to keep deceased Kavita. She committed suicide on account of ill-treatment of Sudhir Kumar and Ravinder Kumar. The admitted hand-writings of deceased Kavita are still to be obtained. The bail application of Sudhir Kumar has been rejected by Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba, on 25.09.2011. It has been stated in the status report that on account of cruel behaviour of Sudhir Kumar,Ravinder Kumar and their families, Kavita committed suicide. The possibility in the commission of offence of Hem Raj and Hem Lata, parents of Ravinder Kumar, cannot be ruled out. The prayer has been made for dismissal of the bail applications.

I have heard Learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. I have perused the alleged suicide note. The case is under investigation. The admitted hand-writings of deceased Kavita are yet to be obtained. Ravinder has been named in the alleged suicide note, however, specific names of Hem Raj and Hem Lata are not mentioned in the alleged suicide note. Though reference of family members of Ravinder Kumar has been made in the alleged suicide note.

According to Petitioners, the marriage between Ravinder and deceased Kavita was solemnized on 17.07.2011. In pursuance of order of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chamba, according to Investigating Agency, the deceased was recovered from the house of Ravinder Kumar and was produced before Sub Divisional Magistrate on 08.09.2011. The deceased opted to go to her parents'' house. The deceased, however, stayed in the hotel and on 09.09.2011 her dead body was recovered from the hotel room. In the alleged suicide note, it has been stated that she has taken the substance under compulsion. The Sulfas bottle was also lying on the bed. Hence, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, Petitioners Hem Raj in Cr. M.P. (M) No. 773 of 2011 and Hem Lata in Cr. M.P. (M) No. 774 of 2011 have made out a case for grant of bail u/s 438 Code of Criminal Procedure., whereas, Petitioner Ravinder Kumar in Cr. M.P. (M) No. 775 of 2011 is not entitled to indulgence of bail at this stage.

Thus, Cr. M.P. (M) No. 775 of 2011 is dismissed. Cr. M.P. (M) Nos. 773 and 774 of 2011 are allowed and in the event of arrest of Petitioners Hem Raj in Cr. M.P. (M) No. 773 of 2011and Hem Lata in Cr. M.P. (M) No. 774 of 2011 in FIR No. 225 of 2011, registered at Police Station, Sadar, Chamba, on 09.09.2011 u/s 306, 34 Indian Penal Code, they be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer with the condition that Petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer and shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. The Petitioner Hem Lata in Cr. M.P. (M) No. 774 of 2011 being a woman shall be interrogated strictly in accordance with law.

The observations made in the judgment are for the disposal of the bail applications only and shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.