MEGHRAJ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is arrested and detained in F.I.R No. 75/2024 registered at Police Station Kolayat, District Bikaner, pertaining to offences punishable under Ss. 498(A), 306 of the I.P.C. and by this petition, he seeks restoration of his liberty on bail-bond.

(2.) Before I proceed to examine the rival contentions it would be appropriate to briefly state the facts of the present case which are that complainant Santosh Bhargav (father of deceased Rekha) lodged a report on 9/4/2024 stating that his daughter Rekha was married to the accused Meghraj in the year 2014. Since the marriage, her in-laws had been harassing and beating her. Meghraj, an alcoholic was involved in an illicit relationship with an another woman. Despite this, his daughter tolerated everything for the sake of the family's honour and the complainant had no knowledge of these issues. Meghraj regularly beated and mistreated his daughter. In the night of 8/4/2024, Meghraj's brother called over pbone and informed him that Rekha had committed suicide. When he arrived at her in-laws' house, he suspected that she had been murdered and that the scene had been staged to appear as a suicide. A charge-sheet has already been submitted after investigation into the matter.

(3.) To begin at the beginning learned counsel representing applicant has fervently argued that this is a case of suicide by a wife after 10 years of marriage. She had three children. Rekha committed suicide of her own free will by hanging herself. In this case, the elements of the offence punishable under Sec. 306 of IPC are not satisfied. It is argued that the reason provided by Police in the investigation for invoking Sec. 306 of IPC is that Meghraj had illicit relations with a woman, which allegedly led Rekha to commit suicide. However, there is no evidence on record to suggest that Meghraj actively abetted Rekha's suicide nor is the presumption under Sec. 113A of Indian evidence act is applicable in this case. Concluding submissions, he asserted that applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.