Balbir Singh And Anr. vs State
1993 Latest Caselaw 119 Del

JUDGMENT

R.L. Gupta, J.

(1) Petitioners who are the father-in-law and husband respectively of the deceased Smt. Kavita are facing prosecution for offences under Sections 498A/304B/201/34 IPC. They have applied for grant of bail,

(2) I have heard arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the parties." The brief facts are that on receipt of a Dd report No. 5-A dated 24.9.92, Sh. Raj Kumar reached J.J. Colony, Tigri and found that the deceased Smt. Kavita had already been cremated on 23.9.92. The parents of the deceased were not found available. They were accordingly called from their village in Haryana. The came on 25.9.92 and Sh. Jai Bhagwan, brother of deceased gave a statement to the police as follows : "I am working in the Punjab National Bank. We are 2 brothers and 4 sisters and are residents of Village Nehra, District Sonepat. Kavita is the youngest and was married on 5.4.92 to Sanjay Kumar (petitioner No.2). At the time of the wedding we spent Rs. 1.5 Lakhs so that my sister could live peacefully. After a few days her in-laws started taunting her about bringing insufficient dowry. When she came home for the first time after marriage, she said that troubled her for bringing less dowry. I pacified my sister and al Mr. Balbir Singh. (who is father-in-law and petitioner No. 1). After a few days Kavita went back to her home. When I went to meet her after a few days she told me that Sanjay used to trouble her by saying that she did not bring scooter, car etc. and on that account be used to beat her. I was very pained on hearing this and I talked to Sanjay's father who assured me that there would be no complaints in future. Later we came to know that Sanjay was carrying on with another girl. On the night of 22.9.92 at about 1.30a.m. Sanjay, Dhan Singh, Raghubir and Jai Bhagwan came and told me that my sister was serious and was admitted in Hospital and that she wanted to talk to me. I went with them immediately to Batra Hospital where the Doctor told me that Kavita was brought dead. On 23.9.92, by about 11 a.m., my mother and father came from the village. During this time I was not allowed to see my sister. At 12 noon, my sister was cremated at Dakshin Puri cremation ground. Due to the death and pressure from the people I could not protest but now I suspect that either my sister was poisoned or that her death was due to her consuming poison. I suspect Sanjay, his father Balbir, Sanjay's motherland brother Ajit."

(3) Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that the relatives of the deceased Kavita attended the cremation and they did not raise their finger at that time about any un-natural circumstance surrounding the death of Kavita. He further contended that according to the report of the Cfsl the death is not due to poisoning and, therefore, the case having been 530 registered against the petitioners on the suspected poisoning falls to the ground because the Cfsl report negatives that aspect. He further contended that it is also mentioned in the Mlc prepared in Batra Hospital that information was given to Ps Dr. Ambedkar Nagar and if the police did not take any action in the matter, even after information, the petitioners could not be blamed and in any case the circumstances were such that the petitioners were entitled to the grant of bail. Lastly he contended that the deceased had actually died because of a fall. On the other hand on behalf of the State, it is pointed out that the deceased was taken to Private Hospital where a proper Mlc was not prepared. It does not even mention as to what history was given in respect of the deceased at the time of her admission in the Hospital. She was taken to the Hospital by the family of the husband and, therefore, they did not disclose the circumstances in which her death had occurred. The marriage took place in this case only on 5.4.92 and she was found dead just after about 5" month of the marriage on 23.9.92.

(4) I have given my due consideration to the contentions advanced on both sides. Prima facie, I am not persuaded to the view that the case as framed against the petitioners by the police after investigation is not made out. It may be noted that in the Mlc prepared in Batra Hospital, it is not mentioned as to what history was given about the deceased when she was admitted in the Batra Hospital. Although it is mentioned in this Mlc that formation was given to Ps Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, no Dd report came into existence on the basis of such report. So, a prima facie presumption can be raised that no such information was given. This fact is further re-inforced by the circumstance that latter on the police has recorded the statement of the Doctor who examined her at that time in which he told the police that he had committed a mistake in not informing the publice. Learned Counsel for the petitioners criticized the manner in which the statement of the Doctor purports to have been recorded The Doctor also says in the statement that he had committed a mistake and he will not commit such mistake in future. The grievance is specially with regard to the aforesaid portion of the statement. It is contended that the tenor of the statement indicated that the Investigating Officer put pressure on the Doctor and that is why such a statement came from Doctor. It is not possible for me to come to such a conclusion at this stage because such a statement could come from the doctor on account of repentence, and the earlier mention in the Mlc that such information was given to the police may well have been under pressure from the in-laws accompanying the deceased. Jai Bhagwan has clearly stated that he was not allowed to see his deceased sister up to about 11 A.M. His parents also came at that time. By 12 O'clock she was even cremated. These circumstances also prima facie cast doubt upon the conduct of the petitioners. But all such conclusions can be said to be tentative and the real truth is likely to come out in trial only. If the contention that the deceased had died because of the fall from the stair case is accepted, there were prima facie bound to be marks of certain external injuries on the body of the deceased. The Mlc indicates that no such injuries were found. Again the non-mention of such injuries in the MLC. if death was due to fall as claimed on behalf of the petitioners, is prima facie possible because of pressure from the side of the petitioners. The fact remains that her death had taken place just within about 5" months of the marriage and the statement of the brother on the basis of which the Fir was recorded indicates that the deceased was being harassed by the petitioners and others for insufficiency of dowry. Simply because presence of poison was not found in the viscera in Cfsl will not be a ground to say that no case is made out against the petitioners. In fact, the complainant only suspected that she might have been finished by poisoning or by consuming poison herself. But the fact remains that Kavita met her end so soon after marriage and the circumstances surrounding her death are not such on the basis of which it could be said that prima facie the petitioners are not liable to be blamed. Rather, here are prima facie reasons to believe the commission of serious offence's under Sections 498A, 304B and 201/34 IPC.

(5) I may also mention that I considered it a little improper that Kavita was taken by her in-laws to Batra Hospital because in such case there is always bound to be some proceedings involving the setting in motion the machinery of criminal law. Learned Counsel for the petitioners in that respect drew my attention to the case of Pt. Parmanand Katara v. Union of India and Ors., to prove that there was no legal impediment for a private doctor to attend to such cases immediately where the question was preservation of life. There is no doubt that every citizen brought for medical aid should instantaneously be given medical aid to preserve life as observed in that case but it further says that thereafter the procedural criminal law should be allowed to operate in order to avoid negligent death. Petitioners fully knew that the death of Kavita in this case took place just within 5" months of the marriage. They should have known that aspersions will always be cast upon them regarding her death and, therefore, if they were really innocent, prima facie they should themselves have taken steps to remove all such doubts by informing the concerned police station or at least a Government hospital where a proper attention is given in such medical cases. That was actually a case where doctor had allegedly refused to attend on the injured while he was still alive and tell the person concerned that he should take the patient to a named different hospital located some 20 kms. away authorized handle to enable medico-legal cases. In that process of taking victim to the other hospital, he succumed to his injuries. In the present case the Mlc of Batra Hospital indicates that the patient was brought dead. Therefore, it is not a case which is at par with the case in the Supreme Court authority. In medico- legal cases, a medical officer is duty bound to inform a duty constable the particulars of the victim etc. and the duty constable in turn informs the concerned police station or higher police functionaries. If such a request was made in this case the real truth might have come out. The petitioners without losing much time cremated Kavita deceased and thereby are prima facie guilty of destroying evidence. The brother and parents of the deceased have rural back ground and the circumstances stated by the brother in which immediate protest could not be registered prima facie inspire confidence. I, therefore, do not find any merit in this application. However, I may clarify that the aforesaid observations have been made by me for the disposal of the bail application and nothing said above will have any bearing on the merits of the case or the conclusions to be reached by the learned trial Court after recording the evidence. Petition is dismissed.