Mohit Kumar alias Billa vs State of Haryana

K.S. Kumaran, J.

F.I.R. No. 375 dated 27.10.1998 has been registered at Police Station City Jagadhari, under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. registered on the statement of Narender Kaur. The petitioner''s application for bail was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jagadhari. Hence this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for bail.

I have heard the counsel for both the sides and have perused the records of file.

As per the F.I.R. Kiran (deceased in this case) started residing in the house near the house of the complainant from a month prior to the report (which formed the basis for the F.I.R.) along with her daughter Sapna aged 4 years. It is also alleged that from 2/3 days prior to this report Kiran''s motherinlaw Shanti, Nanad Rupa and her younger brotherinlaw (petitioner herein) have also been staying with Kiran. According to the F.I.R. on the date of the occurrence, Sapna, the daughter of Kiran came and told the complainant that Rupa, Shanti and petitioner Mohit Kumar had administered some poisonous substance in the mouth of her mother Kiran, on which the complainant came out and saw these persons running away. It is also alleged that the complainant rushed to the room of Kiran, found her crying with pain and froth was also coming from her mouth. The Doctor, who was called, examined and declared Kiran dead.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is wholly unbelievable that a child of 41/2 years of age could have told that complainant that the petitioner and the coaccused had administered some poisonous substance in the mouth of Kiran and this shows that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. Learned counsel for the petitioner also contends that the Doctor who had conducted the post mortem examination of Kiran had not given the cause of death also. He further points out that the two coaccused Shanti and Rupa have been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. No. 12794M of 1999. But the learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that organo phosphorus, a poisonous material, was found to have been consumed and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.

I have already referred to in my order dated 24.8.1999 passed in Crl. Misc. No. 12794M 1999 regarding the two other accused, the contention that the coaccused were not Kiran''s real motherinlaw and sisterinlaw. I have also referred to the disputes and litigations allegedly pending between the family of the petitioner herein and the family of Kirandeceased. Therefore, I have also pointed out the contention put forward that it was therefore, improbable that the petitioner and his coaccused would have come and resided with the deceased at the time of the occurrence.

Taking into consideration all these circumstances and considering the arguments of both sides but at the same time without meaning to express any opinion on the merits of the main case, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

Petition allowed.

Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing sufficient surety to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jagadhri.