Ghanshyam vs State
2021 Latest Caselaw 17703 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1235/2016

Ghanshyam S/o Shri Akharam, by caste Swami, Resident of Inside Idgaah Bari, Police Station Napasar, District Bikaner (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Bhati, P.P.

Mr. S.K. Verma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

Order

November 25, 2021

This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with

Section 401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the Order dated 03.08.2016

passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases),

Bikaner in Sessions Case No. 38/2014 (State of Rajasthan Vs.

Ghanshyam), whereby charges for the offences under Sections

498-A & 306 I.P.C. were ordered to be framed against the

petitioner.

As per prosecution story, on the complaint submitted by

father of the deceased Neelam, namely, Prithviraj, the same was

sent to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for investigation.

As per complaint, deceased Neelam was married to accused

Ghanshyam about 18 years back. After some time, accused

Ghanshyam and his mother started to harass Neelam on account

of demand of dowry. Many times, settlement proceedings were

taken place and Neelam was sent back to her in-laws house. Out

of wedlock of the parties, three children were born. Earlier, F.I.R.

(2 of 4) [CRLR-1235/2016]

Nos. 123/2005 and 665/2008 were registered against her in-laws

for committing cruelty with Neelam. However, on account of

apology made by the accused, she was sent back to her in-laws

house. The criminal cases were settled through compromise with

the hope that circumstances will improve in her favour. However,

there was no change in the behaviour of the accused. On

05.09.2013 in the night, Ghanshyam informed the complainant on

telephone regarding death of Neelam, on which, he went to the

hospital, where he found his daughter dead. The report regarding

unnatural death of his daughter bearing Inquest Report No. 21

dated 06.09.2013 was registered but no proceedings were taken.

As per averment in the complaint, two days before the

incident, Neelam informed on telephone to her father regarding ill-

treatment extended to her by her husband and mother-in-law. On

the same day, Neelam also telephoned her younger sister Seema

and informed her regarding cruel behaviour of the accused. In the

complaint, it was also alleged that Ghanshyam and his mother in

furtherance of the conspiracy, killed his daughter by administering

the poison. On the basis of the said complaint, the F.I.R. No.

283/2013 was registered for the offences under Sections 406,

498A, 323 & 302 I.P.C. After investigation, the charge-sheet was

filed against Ghanshyam, petitioner herein, for the offence under

Section 306 I.P.C. The trial court, after hearing the parties,

passed the Order dated 03.08.2016 ordering to frame charges

under Sections 498-A & 306 I.P.C. against the petitioner.

Aggrieved with the order of the trial court, the present revision

petition has been preferred by the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material on record as well as order impugned.

(3 of 4) [CRLR-1235/2016]

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there

was no material available on record to assume that the petitioner

committed offences under Sections 498-A & 306 I.P.C. The

children of the deceased Neelam also did not support the

allegations made by the complainant. The deceased Neelam

committed suicide for which the petitioner was not responsible. At

the time of incident, the petitioner was not present at the spot.

There was no reason to assume that the petitioner instigated the

deceased to commit suicide. There was also no evidence on

record to suggest that there was any dowry demand on the part of

the petitioner. In the circumstances, learned counsel for the

petitioner has prayed to allow this revision petition and set aside

the order impugned.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgment

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.V. Prakash Babu

Vs. State of Karnataka (Criminal Appeal No(s). 1138-1139

of 2016) decided on 22.11.2016 wherein the provisions of

Section 498A I.P.C. were analysed with the help of other

judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and it has been held that if

the husband gets involved in extra marital affairs that may not in

all circumstances invite conviction under Section 306 of I.P.C. but

definitely that can be a ground for divorce or other reliefs in a

matrimonial dispute under other enactments.

Learned Public Prosecutor while supporting the order

impugned has submitted that the trial court after appreciating

entire material as well as evidence on record, rightly passed the

order for framing charges under Sections 498-A & 306 of I.P.C.

against the petitioner.

(4 of 4) [CRLR-1235/2016]

In the present case, it is not in dispute that deceased

Neelam committed suicide by consuming some poisonous

substance. The reason behind committing suicide as mentioned in

the charge report, is demand of dowry and physical & mental

harassment on the part of the petitioner with the deceased. In

support of allegations, there are police statements of father of the

deceased Prithviraj, Amarnath, Lal Singh and Kishanlal. It is true

that children of the deceased have not levelled any allegation

against their father for this incident. However, in the considered

opinion of this Court, the statements of Prithviraj, Amarnath, Lal

Singh and Kishanlal cannot be scrutinized on merits at this stage.

From perusal of the record, it also reveals that from the year 2005

or even before that, dispute arose between the parties for which

F.I.Rs. were also lodged against the petitioner. At this stage, it

cannot be held that there is no nexus between alleged ill-

treatment on the part of the petitioner with his wife Neelam (since

deceased) and committing suicide by her. Hence, the trial court

has committed no error in framing charges for the offences under

Sections 498-A & 306 of I.P.C. against the petitioner.

Accordingly, the present criminal revision petition is

dismissed. The order framing charge dated 03.08.2016 passed by

the trial court is affirmed and the trial court is directed to proceed

with the matter as per law expeditiously.

The record of the trial court be sent back forthwith.

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J

Inder/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)