PEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Section 397(2)/401 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been directed against the order dated 4.2.1992 passed by learned Sessions Judge Sirohi in Criminal Revision Petition No. 29/89 'State v. Peer Sing and Ors.', whereby he accepted the revision petition filed on behalf of the State and set aside the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Shiv -Ganj dated 13.9.1989 discharging the petitioners of the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. and directed the learned Magistrate to pass orders in accordance with law after hearing the parties.

(2.) SUCCINCTLY stated the necessary facts for the disposal of this petition are that on 22.9.1986 Shri Kushal Singh, S.H.O., Police Station, Shivganj registered Crime No. 68/86 under Section 498A I.P.C. on the basis of a F.I.R. lodged by him, wherein, it was alleged that the deceased Smt. Antar Kanwar was married to petitioner Peer Singh about 10 years ago, that her 'Gauna' ceremony had taken place about 4 years back and that after the 'Gauna (Aana)' she lived for some times at her in -laws house and some time with her parents. It was alleged that Peer Singh used to mal -treat her and therefore she started living with her parents. On 12.2.1986 Smt. Antar Kanwar had lodged a report at Police Station, Shivganj to the effect that she had come from her husband's house at her own accord and started living with her parents. Again on 15.2.1986, Moti Singh, the uncle of Smt. Antar Kanwar got a report entered at Police Station, Shivganj to the effect that persons belonging to village Lakma i.e. her husband's village had come to forcibly take her away. Thereupon the S.H.O. Sumer Singh went to the village, where he found that near a temple petitioner Peer Singh and his 15 -20 companions were sitting. There, Sardar Singh, the father of Smt. Antar Kanwar had informed the S.H.O. that a meeting of panchas of their community had been convened, that no body was forcibly taking away Smt. Antar Kanwar and that their dispute would be solved by the panchas. It is alleged that at the persuasion of the panchas, petitioner Peer Singh took his wife Smt. Antar Kanwar to his house. On 4.3.1986 at about 7 -8 p.m. when Smt. Antar Kanwar was cooking food, she caught fire and was immediately rushed to Govt. Hospital, Sirohi. On 5.3.1986 at 1.30 p.m. the Assistant Collector and Executive Magistrate, Sirohi recorded the statement of Smt. Antar Kanwar, wherein she specifically deposed that she had accidently caught fire when she was liting the 'Chula' for preparing the food. On 7.3.1986 Ram Gopal Purohit, Dy. S.P. Sirohi also recorded her statement, wherein she repeated the same version and also stated that she wanted to go to her parent's house because her husband Peer Singh was a poor person and that she had to work at his house, which she did not like. She also stated that Peer Singh and her in -laws did not make any demand for dowry or committed cruelty towards her and that she did not attempt to commit suicide. It is the case of the prosecution that Smt. Antar Kanwar remained in the Govt. Hospital, Sirohi till 12.3.1986, when her mother took her away and got her admitted at General Hospital at Udiapur. She remained in the said hospital till 30.4.86 from where she was discharged, and while she was being taken to her village she died in the way. On 1.5.1986, her dead body was cremated by her parents without getting her post -mortem examination conducted. The police initiated proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. In the meanwhile, Moti Singh the uncle of the deceased went a letter to the I.G. Police Jaipur and prayed for a detailed inquiry. The said complaint was sent to the Dy. S.P., Sirohi and was ultimately handed over to Shri Kushal Singh, S.H.O., Police Station, Shivganj, who recorded the statement of Smt. Najo the mother of the deceased on 22.9.1986, Smt. Naju in her statement stated to the S.H.O. that her daughter Smt. Antar Kanwar had told her that petitioner Bhim Singh, his wife, Bahadur Singh and Devi Singh had collected the material for burning her and that they had thrown her in the fire. On the statement of Smt. Najo, the S.H.O. himself lodged a report and registered the case and after investigation submitted a charge -sheet against the present petitioners. It may be mentioned here that the wives of Bhim Singh and Bahadur Singh as well as Devi Singh were not challaned.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor at length and very carefully perused the record of the lower courts in extenso.