The High Court allowed a second bail application filed by a petitioner holding a personal bond and two sureties. The court relied on a postmortem and FSL report indicating no unnatural death while noting the trial would be lengthy.
Accused released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 963/2022
Saddam Hussain S/o Ibrahim Shah, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Bhakari, Tehsil Parbatsar District Nagaur. (At Present Lodged in Sub Jail, Parbatsar).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)
: Mr. Ravindra Acharya : Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA Order
01/04/2022
The present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No.70/2021 at Police Station Pilva, District Nagaur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B of IPC.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor, at length. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that for the offence of Section 304-B of IPC, it is necessary that death must be occurred within 7 years of marriage and cause of the death must be unnatural, by burn or by any other injury etc.; as per FSL report, no injury is found on the body of the deceased; as per postmortem report, cause of the death will be provided after the FSL report and as per FSL report, report of packet marked as B and C respectively gave negative test for metallic poisons, ethyl and methyl alcohol etc.; there is no evidence available on record
(2 of 3)
[CRLMB-963/2022]
which shows that the death of the deceased Praveen Bano @ Guddi is unnatural; on the contrary, as per the statements of Ismail s/o Ibrahim, Rameshwar, Chotu Ram s/o Balu Ram, Kana Ram s/o Balu Ram, Gopi Ram s/o Balu Ram, deceased was suffering from chest pain and for treatment, she was taken to the hospital; deceased on the way to the hospital was complaining about unbearable chest pain and she was screaming and stated that she might die due to unbearable chest pain. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that deceased was suffering from the disease and death of the deceased was natural, hence, offence under Section 304-B IPC cannot be made out against the petitioner. Learned counsel further stated that petitioner is facing incarceration since 11.05.2021; charge-sheet has also been filed and trial will take long time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently and fervently opposed the bail application and stated that as per the statements of parents and the family members of the deceased Praveen @ Guddi and the statements of villagers – Santosh Devi, Sushila Devi, Tara Chand, Pramod Kumar etc., deceased was regularly being harassed for dowry demand by the accusedpetitioner; cause of death is dowry demand and as per the statements of parents and family members of the deceased, 10 to 15 days earlier from the date of death, she was beaten by the petitioner and there was injury near the eye of the deceased, therefore, it is an unnatural death.
In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that as per the postmortem report, there is no injury on the body part of the
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-963/2022]
deceased, even no injury is found near the eye of the deceased; at the most, on the basis of the statements of abovementioned witnesses, only offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC can be made out against the petitioner; there is no evidence available on record which shows that offence under Section 304-B IPC can be made out against the petitioner in this case.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the postmortem report and FSL report which show that there is no injury on the body part of the deceased; no poison is found in the body of the deceased; accused-petitioner is facing incarceration since 11.05.2021; charge-sheet has also been filed and trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.
Consequently, the present bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner - Saddam Hussain S/o Ibrahim Shah , arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.70/2021 at Police Station Pilva, District Nagaur , shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of ₹50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) and two sureties of ₹25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J
27-Arvind/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner charged under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC in a matrimonial dispute.
Whether the evidence on record establishes an offence under Section 304-B IPC requiring unnatural death within seven years of marriage.
Whether the natural circumstances of the deceased's death preclude the maintaining of an offence under Section 304-B IPC.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Saddam Hussain S/o Ibrahim Shah
State of Rajasthan through PP
DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
