Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Deepak on 27 January, 2020
Author: S.C.Sharma
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE NO.17766 OF 2019
(State of Madhya Pradesh vs Deepak and Others)
Indore, Dated 27.01.2020
Mr. L.S. Chandiramani, learned public prosecutor for
the applicant/State.
Mr. Mastan Singh, learned counsel for the non-
applicants.
Arguments heard.
ORDER
Per Shailendra Shukla,J:
Submissions were made on application filed under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the order of acquittal pronounced by Additional Sessions Judge, Badnawar, District-Dhar (MP) in Sessions Trial No.5000139/2016 vide judgment dated 29.01.2019 acquitting the non-applicants from charges framed under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 306/302 (in alternative) of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The prosecution story in short was that deceased- Kavita was married to Deepak on 01.04.2014 and the deceased was being harassed on account of dowry. On 07.07.2016, the deceased committed suicide by pouring kerosene oil over herself and she died on the way to hospital. A merg was instituted and subsequently FIR was registered and non-applicants were chargesheeted. By the impugned judgment, it has been observed that prosecution could not prove that the non-applicants were harassing the deceased-Kavita for bringing less dowry.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE MISC. CRIMINAL CASE NO.17766 OF 2019 (State of Madhya Pradesh vs Deepak and Others) In the application filed under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it has been mentioned that the Court has not paid any heed to the statements of parents of deceased who has stated that the deceased used to be harassed for bringing less dowry. It has also been stated that the death of Kavita has occurred within seven years of her marriage, that the death occurred in the house of non-applicants and onus was upon the non-applicants to clarify as to under what circumstances the deceased had taken such an extreme step.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the non- applicants submitted that the parents of deceased had no concern for her and they did not visit the house of Kavita for the last 15 months after her marriage and due to such frustration, she committed suicide.
Perused the original record of the case. There is an evidence to the effect that during illness of Sardar Singh the deceased had gone to see her father along with her husband. It has also been brought out in the evidence that the father of the deceased had gone to the house of deceased-Kavita for taking his daughter back to her matrimonial home after her marriage as per customary rites. However, the deceased-Kavita did not accompany Sardar Singh as she was restrained to go to her matrimonial home by the non-applicants.
Learned counsel has pointed out to para-51 of the HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE MISC. CRIMINAL CASE NO.17766 OF 2019 (State of Madhya Pradesh vs Deepak and Others) judgment in which the Court has observed that different relatives of the deceased talked differently about the behaviour of non-applicants, however, a perusal of para 51 of the judgment did not justify such observation. Although different words are used by witnesses regarding the behaviour of non-applicants towards deceased all such words connote “harassment” to deceased. The crux of the deposition of witnesses is that the deceased used to be harassed and ill-treated in respect of dowry. It was also found that the husband of the deceased namely; Deepak had not even participated in the last rites of his wife (para-62 of the judgment).
The above circumstances apart the non-applicants were required to discharge the onus as to under what circumstances the deceased-Kavita had committed suicide. No appropriate explanation has been offered by the non- applicants. In the last, it can also be seen that extreme step was taken by Kavita two years of her marriage and suicide was committed in her in-laws house. Hence presumption clauses under Evidence Act are also attracted.
After duly considering the evidence available on record, this appears to be a fit case for grant of leave to appeal against acquittal. Hence I am inclined to allow the application filed under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and application for grant of leave to appeal is allowed.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE MISC. CRIMINAL CASE NO.17766 OF 2019 (State of Madhya Pradesh vs Deepak and Others) Office is directed to register criminal appeal. Let a bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each be issued against the non-applicants for their appearance before the trial Court on 02.03.2020. The non-applicants shall furnish solvent surety of Rs.20,000/- each with personal bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 19.03.2020.
Appeal be listed on the question of admission on 19.03.2020.
With the aforesaid facts, this Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.17766 of 2019 is allowed and is disposed of.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(S.C. SHARMA) (SHAILENDRA SHUKLA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Arun/-
Digitally signed by
ARUN NAIR
Date: 2020.01.30
11:46:05 +05’30’