PISHORI LAL BABHAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for cancellation of bail under Section 439(2), Cr.PC, granted under Section 438, Cr.PC to the non -petitioners No. 2 to 5.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that Smt. Manju died on December 15, 1986 on account of burns. A report of the incident was made to the Police Station, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur where a case was registered on the same day. During the course of investigation/enquiry the statements of petitioner Pishori Lal and Smt. Sheela father and mother of the deceased were recorded on December 16, 1985 in the presence of Dy. S.P. who counter signed the said statements. In these statements, no allegation of cruelty of dispute on account of any demand of dowery, etc., was alleged and it was also stated that deceased Manju did not complain against any member of her in laws. The cremation of the deceased was made in presence of the petitioner. Thereafter about 10 days, the petitioner made a complaint in the form of a letter/application on December 26, 1985 on the basis of which investigation was made and the First Information Report No. 98/86 was registered under Section 498A and 306, IPC at Police Station, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur. After investigation, the police found that deceased had committed suicide and no case was made out, as such the Final Report was submitted by the Police. Thereafter, a complaint was filed by the petitioner in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jaipur City on January 5, 1987, which was sent to the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur City as it related to the jurisdiction of that court. Subsequently, the complaint was transferred to the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Jaipur City who took cognizance on the said complaint, after recording the statements of the witnesses under Sections 200 and 202, Cr.PC and ordered to issue process against the non -petitioners No. 2 to 5 and summoned them by non -bailable warrants vide order dated December 15, 1987.

(3.) THE contention of Shri Sital Das, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that in case of dowery death, the bail should not be granted by the courts and reliance in this respect has been placed on the case of Samunder Singh v. State of Raj. 1987 CAR 132. This was a matter in which investigation was in progress when the application for grant of anticipatory bail was filed. In the present case, the incident occurred on December 15, 1985, the petitioner and mother of the deceased gave the statement on the next day, i.e., December 16, 1985 that they had no quarrel with the non -petitioners No. 2 to 5 and no demand of dowery was made from them nor the deceased had made any such complaint to them. There after on application wasfiled by the petitioner on December 26, 1985, further investigation was made and Final Report was given by the Police on January 8, 1987. Again a private complaint was filed by the complainant and the court thereafter issued non -bailable warrants to non -petitioner Nos. 2 to 5. It is, therefore, clear that the above authority is not applicable to the facts of the present matter as investigation had already been completed by the police and even Final Report had been filed.