Smt. Rajo vs State of Haryana

M.L. Singhal, J.—Prosecution case runs as follows :

Smt. Lata daughter of Shri Chander Kishore of Dehradun was married to Jai Kunwar in 1995. Smt. Lata gave birth to a son from this marriage. Adequate amount was spent on her marriage by her parents. Whenever she went to Dehradun, she told her parental side that her mother-in-law Smt. Rajo, husband Jai Kunwar, husband''s brother Mahavir were always taunting her and harassing her that she belonged to the family of paupers and had brought nothing for them in dowry. On the occasion of Holi, she visited Dehradun and told her brother Manoj Kumar, mother Smt. Bimla that she had been sent to Dehradun by her husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law to bring Rs. 50,000/- from them because they required money to construct house. She further told them that she had been warned not to return to Panipat . without money. Manoj Kumar went to Panipat with Rs. 20,000/- alongwith his sister Lata. He handed over Rs. 20,000/- to Smt. Rajo. He promised to send the remaining amount after arranging it. He requested not to harass Smt. Lata. Manoj Kumar, however, could not arrange the remaining amount. On 13.6.1998 at about 11 p.m., Manoj Kumar received telephonic call from Jai Kunwar that Smt. Lata had died. Thereupon, he, his brother Amit, mother Bimla, father Chander Kishore and brother-in-law (sister''s husband Sanjay) came to Panipat to the house of Jai Kunwar. They learnt from neighbours that Smt. Lata had been tormented so much by Jai Kunwar, Mahavir and Smt. Rajo that Smt. Lata thought it better to put an end to her life and she had doused herself on 12.6.1998 at 8.30 p.m. and set herself ablaze and died. Jai Kunwar and Mahavir cremated the dead body with the help of his relations so that there was no evidence left that it was dowry death.

According to the prosecution, Smt. Lata was sacrified at the altar of dowry by her husband Jai Kunwar, mother-in-law Smt. Rajo and brother-in-law Mahavir on 12.6.1998 when her marriage was only 3 years old. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Smt. Rajo had nothing to do with the alleged demand of dowry upon Smt. Lata as Smt. Rajo was putting up separate from Smt. Lata and Smt. Lata was putting up with her husband separate from the rest of the family. In support of this submission, he has drawn my attention to Ration Card No. 956489 Azad Nagar, Panipat in which Smt. Rajo, her husband and her daughters are shown. He has drawn my attention to Ration Card No. 956468 Azad Nagar, Panipat where Jai Kunwar and his family is shown. In Ration Card No. 956468, Mai Ram, Smt. Raj Rani etc. do not figure. It has been submitted that house was partitioned long back and Mahavir, Subhash sons of Mai Ram and Jai Kunwar son of Mai Ram are in separate possession and decree was obtained by them showing that they are owners in possession of separate portions of the house. In support of this submission, he has drawn my attention to the decree sheet drawn up on 20.11.1989 by Sub Judge 1st Class, Panipat. Suffice it to say, this one house namely house No. 593 which was divided among Mahavir, Subhash and Jai Kunwar. Nothing has been brought to my notice that after the death of Mai Ram, Smt. Rajo is putting up with such and such son. Smt. Rajo, according to Manoj Kumar, brother of Smt. Lata, figured in the talk whenever his sister visited Dehradun and told them about the demand of dowry and the taunts. According to Manoj Kumar, they gave Rs. 20,000/- to Smt. Rajo in pursuance of their demand for Rs. 50,000/- and promised that he would arrange the remaining amount.

It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that funeral took place at 7 p.m. on 13.6.1998. Brother of Lata and her cousin i.e. son of maternal uncle attended the funeral. They attended the funeral as in the morning of 13.6.1998 her parents had been informed about her death during the night intervening 12/ 13.6.1998 and FIR was lodged on 14.6.1998. It has been submitted that FIR was lodged on 14.6.1998 with a view to blackmail them and extract money.

It has been further submitted that it was Jai Kunwar''s third marriage. He was 35 years old while Lata was 22-23 years old arid how could Jai Kunwar command any dowry when it was his third marriage and also there was disparity of age. Suffice it to say, Smt. Lata''s death took place within 3 years of her marriage in the house of her husband and they are silent about the cause of death. It has been further submitted that the petitioner is an old woman and she has to look after her grand-son i.e. the son of Smt. Lata. Looking to the facts and circumstances, I deem it proper not to allow bail to the petitioner particularly when the case is still in the stage of investigation and evidence is being collected. So, this criminal miscellaneous petition fails and is dismissed.

Prosecution evidence shall, however, be concluded on or before 31.12.1998 by the learned Trial Court. If prosecution evidence remains un-concluded till then, the petitioner shall be deemed to be on bail.