PREM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - Heard. Perused the challan papers and other relevant record.

(2.) MR. Kharlia has vehemently contended that though the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh Camp Suratgarh has framed charge for the offences u/ss. 304-B and 498 IPC against the petitioner and other co-accused persons, still then there are new circumstances calling-for the grant of bail to the present petitioner. Firstly, after the petitioner's second bail application was rejected, principal accused Smt. Rukmani has been granted bail by this Court vide its order dated 6. 1. 94 passed in S. B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 1873/93 and secondly, in the dying declarations dated 14. 3. 93 and 16. 3. 93, deceased Smt. Janak did not implicate the petitioner at all and that Rajendra Taneja maternal uncle of the deceased in his statement dated 15. 1. 93 recorded by the Delhi Police also did not implicate the petitioner, but after the death of deceased Smt. Janak, in his subsequent statement dated 18/3/93, he has tried to implicate the petitioner, but the other witnesses do not corroborate him. According to MR. Kharlia, Rajendra Taneja has improved his previous statement and has tried to falsely implicate the petitioner.

(3.) DECEASED Smt. Janak in her dying declarations dt. 14. 3. 93 and thereafter on 16. 3. 93, which were recorded by two different S. D. Ms, at Suratgarh and Delhi, did not attribute any overt act to the petitioner. On the other hand, she stated that at the time Rukmani & Bhago set her to fire, petitioner was not present & that subsequently he tried to save her. The petitioner also received burn injuries on his person. It is only in the subsequent statement of Rajendra Taneja dated 18/3/93 and the statement of Shyam Sunder dated 20/3/93 recorded under sec. 161 Cr. P. C, it has been disclosed that deceased Smt. Janak did not call anything against her husband, petitioner Prem Kumar keeping in view the welfare of her daughter Anu, aged, about one and a half years. On the other hand, Smt. Ishwari Devi, mother of the deceased, in her statement recorded u/s. 161 Cr. P. C. has stated that she was present in Suratgarh hospital and that Smt. Janak had not complained or attributed any overt act against the petitioner Prem Kumar.