Kanta Devi vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Kuldip Singh, Judge

This judgment shall dispose of Cr.MP(M) No.508 of 2012, Cr.MP(M) No.509 of 2012 filed by Kanta Devi and Reena Devi respectively u/s 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing them on bail in FIR No.49/12 dated 29.5.2012 registered at Police Station, Bangana for offences under Sections 498A, 306, 34 IPC. Kanta Devi is the mother-in-law and Reena Devi is the sister-in-law of deceased Anuradha. The petitioners have stated that allegations in the FIR are false. The husband and wife (deceased) were living separately since long. They were having separate ration card. Reena Devi is a patient of paralysis for the last many years and is under treatment. The petitioners never interfered in the matrimonial life of deceased. The marriage of the deceased was solemnized about 10 years ago. The petitioners are innocent. They are ready to join investigation and furnish bail bonds in accordance with directions of the Court. The submission has been made for releasing the petitioners on bail.

The status report has been filed in Cr.MP(M) No.508 of 2012. It has been stated that complainant Sumna Devi on 29.5.2012 came to the police station and submitted an application. The complainant has stated that her two daughters were married in village Karor, Tehsil Bangana, Anuradha was married in the year 2002 with Devinder. Anuradha has two daughters from the wedlock. Devinder was in private service but now from quite some time he was unemployed.

The conduct of Devinder remained proper with Anuradha for some time after the marriage but thereafter he started taunting and giving beatings to Anuradha. The complainant several times had advised her daughter and son-in-law but Devinder did not improve. The complainant also took the help of her relations to make her son-in-law understand but about 15 days ago Anuradha told the complainant on telephone that Devinder and his mother Kanta Devi gave beatings to her. They asked Anuradha to leave the house. Anuradha also told that her mother-in-law said that her elder daughter-in-law earlier died by consuming poison, she told Anuradha also to consume poison. The complainant advised her daughter. The mother-in-law of Anuradha also assured that in future they would not ill-treat Anuradha.

On 28.5.2012 at about 7 p.m. the complainant received telephone on her mobile from Reena Devi from Dharamshala and told the complainant to ask Anuradha to improve or take care of Anuradha. Reena Devi threatened that failing which she would set right Anuradha. The complainant immediately contacted Anurdaha on telephone, who told that her sister-in-law had disturbed their home. Anuradha also told that Reena Devi was responsible for beatings to her at the instance of her mother-in-law and husband. Anuradha thereafter switched off her mobile. The complainant tried to contact Anuradha but her mobile remained switched off throughout the day.

The complainant contacted her daughter Sapna Devi on telephone. Sapna Devi told the complainant that Anuradha was quite angry and said that now all limits had been crossed. It was not possible to tolerate. At about 9 p.m. Sapna Devi told that Reena Devi had come from Dharamshala and Anuradha had consumed poison on the arrival of Reena Devi. Anuradha had been taken to Bangana and she died. The complainant has stated that Anuradha ended her life due to the torture of her husband Devinder, mother-in-law Kanta Devi, sister-in-law Reena Devi. On this case has been registered.

The statements of witnesses have been recorded. A tube of Aluminum Phosphide has been recovered from the spot. The postmortem report of the body of Anuradha has been obtained. Devinder was arrested on 29.5.2012. The petitioners joined the investigation after obtaining interim bail from the Court. It has come in the investigation that Reena Devi on 28.5.2012 told mother of Anuradha that Anuradha was not behaving properly and she would set her right. Reena Devi came to her parents house and out of fear of Reena Devi, Anuradha consumed poison and ended her life. The submission has been made for rejection of the bail application.

Heard and perused the record. It has been submitted by Learned Counsel for the petitioners that Devinder and Anuradha were married about 10 years ago. The learned Addl. Advocate General on instructions has stated that Anuradha had given birth to two daughters now aged seven and five years. The Learned Counsel for the petitioners has stated that the deceased and her husband were living separately. There was some dispute between husband and wife due to unemployment of husband. The close relatives intervened to smoothen the relations between husband and wife but it appears it was not taken in good taste. The deceased abruptly ended her life.

The petitioner Reena Devi is married living separately and herself is a paralytic patient. In the status report it has been stated that on the fateful date Reena Devi came and out of fear Anuradha consumed poison and ended her life. The investigating agency has not pointed out any previous report to the lawful authorities regarding the misconduct of the petitioners nor any suicide note or writing of the deceased has been relied by the investigating agency. There is nothing in the status report that petitioners will not be available in case they are released on bail nor any recovery is to be made from the petitioners. It has not been stated that for what purpose custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required. The petitioners have made out a case for grant of bail u/s 438 Cr.P.C.

In view of above, Cr.MP(M) No. 508 of 2012 and Cr.MP(M) No. 509 of 2012 are allowed. Kanta Devi and Reena Devi petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 49/12 dated 29.5.2012 registered at Police Station, Bangana for offences under Sections 498A, 306, 34 IPC 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 Arresting Officer, with the condition that the petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. They shall maintain absolute peaceful and lawful conduct during the pendency of the case. The petitioners are women; they shall be interrogated strictly in accordance with law. The observations made in the judgment are for disposal of the bail applications and shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

Copy ''Dasti''.