Bombay High Court
Madan Dharma Rathod vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 14 November, 2017
Bench: S.S. Shinde
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 632 OF 2016
Madan Dharma Rathod
Age:40 Years, Occ.: Labour
R/o Bhamratta, Tq. Pansemal,
Dist.Badwani (Madhya Pradesh) .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1] The State of Maharashtra
(Copy to be served on A.P.P.
High Court of Judicature of
Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad)
2] Dinesh Rohidas Chavan,
age major, Occu.Agriculture.
3] Rohidas Jaysingh Chavan,
Age major, Occu.Agriculturist.
4] Narmadabai Rohidas Chavan,
age major, Occu.Household.
5] Pintya Rohidas Chavan,
age major, Occu.Agriculturist.
6] Kavita Pintya Chavan,
age major, Occu.Household.
7] Dilip Rohidas Chavan,
age major, Occu.Agriculturist.
8] Sunabai Dilip Chavan,
age major, Occu.Household.
Respondent Nos.2 to 8 R/o Paapner
Taluka & Dist.Nandurbar.
::: Uploaded on - 14/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 15/11/2017 02:07:07 :::
2
9] Superintend of Police,
Nandurbar, District Nandurbar
10] Police Inspector, Upnagar Police
Station, Nandurbar, Tq. & Dist.
Nandurbar. .. RESPONDENTS
------
Mr.P.S.Paranjape, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr.S.P.Deshmukh, APP for Respondent/State.
Mr.J.R.Shah,Adv. for respondents 2 to 8.
-----
CORAM : S.S.SHINDE &
MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 6/11/ 2017.
PRONOUNCED ON :14/11/2017.
JUDGMENT ( PER MANGESH S. PATIL,J.) :
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
with the consent of the parties.
2] In this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the
petitioner is seeking investigation into the cause of death of his
married daughter with following prayers :
"b] By Writ of Mandamus or any
other appropriate writ as this Hon'ble Court
deems fit and proper, the respondent no.9
may kindly be directed to register an
offence against respondent no.2 to 8 and 10
by converting accidental death into
homicidal death;
c] In view of the fact that the Police
Inspector himself had committed an act of
abatement, the Superintendent of Police or
Sub-Divisional Police Officer may be
directed to investigate the crime; "
3] According to the petitioner, he is originally resident of
Madhya Pradesh and has been working as labourer on
construction sites in Eklahare, Dist.Nashik. His daughters Savita
and Jyoti were married at the same time on 20/5/2015 in the
same ceremony. Jyoti was married to the respondent no.2 as
per the customs and usual traditions. Soon after the marriage,
respondent no.2 started harassing Jyoti by raising demand for
motor cycle. He and the other in-laws respondents 3 to 8
started ill treating her to pressurise her to meet the demand.
Sensing that there was some problem with Jyoti in cohabiting
with the respondents 2 to 8, during the Diwali festival in the
month of November 2015, he sent his son Savan to stay with
Jyoti at her matrimonial home.
4] The petitioner has then averred that on 3/12/2015, when
he was at Eklahare, Dist.Nashik, he received phone call from
his brother Sukhlal, informing that Jyoti was serious. The
petitioner with his wife immediately left for the in-law's place at
Paapnerpada, Dist.Nandurbar and reached there on the next
day i.e. 4/12/2015. But Jyoti was already dead in hospital at
Nandurbar. They noticed that their son Savan was also
frightened and was unable to speak anything. While the
petitioner and his family was under shock, the respondents 2
and 3 took him to the police station, where he was made to sign
a paper but the contents were not read over to him. The
respondents 2 and 3 paid him Rs.50,000/- in the police station
itself stating that they were returning the dowry received at the
time of marriage.
5] According to the petitioner, police and the respondents 2
to 8 pretended that Jyoti had mistakenly consumed
insecticide/Rodent instead of cough syrup. After the last rituals,
Savan gathered courage and informed the petitioner what had
actually happened. He informed that Jyoti's in-laws were
always demanding money from her for purchasing a motor cycle
and when she expressed her inability to meet the demand, her
father-in-law used to manhandle her. He also told that on
3/12/2015, she was administered something and was taken to
the hospital. Thus, according to the petitioner, the police
machinery is hand in glows with the respondents 2 to 3 and
have been pushing the incident under carpet. Hence this
Petition.
6] We have heard learned advocate for the petitioner. He has
submitted, in consonance with the averments in the Petition,
that it is highly unbelievable and improbable that the deceased
could have consumed insecticide under some mistake instead
of cough syrup. This circumstance itself is sufficient to doubt the
investigation being carried out by police. Learned advocate also
submitted that in the peculiar facts and circumstances, no
adverse inference can be drawn against the petitioner for delay
in filing the complaint making grievance about death of Jyoti.
7] The learned APP appearing for respondent State
submitted that since the entire inquiry conducted by the
subordinate police officer has been examined by the police
officer of the highest rank in the district, who has forwarded his
report supporting the result of the inquiry. No fault can be found
in it and no directions in the nature of fishing inquiry need to be
given.
8] By order dated 9/12/2016, this Court had directed the
Station Officer of Upnagar police station, Nandurbar who was
incharge of investigation to record the statement of petitioner
and his son Savan. Accordingly the police papers have been
submitted alongwith the report dated 12/10/2016 by the
Superintendent of Police, Nandurbar. In the report, it has been
submitted inter alia that during the course of inquiry into the
Accidental Death, which was registered initially, it has been
transpired that final cause of death, after chemical analysis of
the viscera has been turned out to be "Cardio Respiratory arrest
due to effect of Organophosphorus that is Monocrotophos
(Nyvacron) poisoning". It has been mentioned that when first
Accidental Death case was registered, the petitioner had not
made any grievance. On the contrary he had stated that he was
not suspecting any foul play. There were no ante-mortem
injuries found on the dead body during the post mortem
examination. After the last rites were performed, when the Sub
Divisional Police Officer, Nandurbar inquired with the petitioner
and his wife as well as the paternal uncle of the deceased, they
all had stated that they had no grievance. Witnesses from the
neighbourhood of Jyoti's in-law's place also did not state
anything about any marital discard or any harassment meted
out to her. Lastly, it has also been noted that the grievance was
for the first time made after 15 days of the death.
9] After considering all these grounds mentioned by
Superintendent of Police, Nandurbar and the papers, we do not
apparently see any justifiable cause or reason to doubt inquiry
being conducted by the police.
10] Besides, the son of the petitioner Savan was staying with
deceased Jyoti in the house of respondents 2 to 8 for few days
and was also present there on the date of the actual incident. If
at all there was any foul play to his knowledge he would have
promptly informed about it to his parents, may be a day or two
later after the death. It is difficult to digest that Savan did not
speak out the actual incident as he was frightened. This in our
view, is an additional circumstance which goes to the root of the
matter. It would be sheer abuse of process of law to still direct a
fishing inquiry to be made.
11] Under these circumstances, we find no sufficient and
justifiable reason to disbelieve the conclusion drawn by the
police which is duly examined by the Superintendent of Police,
Nandurbar. The Petition therefore fails and is dismissed. Rule
is discharged.
( MANGESH S. PATIL,J.) (S.S.SHINDE ,J.)
umg/
