Allowed

Smt. Khushbu v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Jul 2024CRLMP/593/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, married sisters-in-law of a deceased woman, were arraigned as accused by the trial court under Section 193 CrPC despite police charge sheet exonerating them. Court found insufficient material and quashed the cognizance order; trial may continue against charge-sheeted accused, prosecution may invoke Section 319 later.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 12-01-2023 taking cognizance against petitioners quashed and set aside; petitioners freed from arraignment; trial to proceed against charge-sheeted accused only.

Smt. Khushbu Vs State of Rajasthan — Dowry and Cruelty | Rajasthan HC (2024)

(1 of 7)

[2024:RJ-JD:25530]

[CRLMP-593/2023]

[2024:RJ-JD:25530]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶6

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 593/2023

¶7

Smt. Khushbu W/o Sh. Priyevarth, Aged About 23 Years, B/c Charan, R/o 173 Balaji Nagar, Near Gokul School Pal Balaji, Teh. And Dist. Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶8

Smt. Mahak W/o Sh. Harsh, Aged About 20 Years, B/c Charan, R/o 173 Balaji Nagar, Near Gokul School Pal Balaji, Teh. And Dist. Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶9

----Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Karni Dan S/o Sh. Kishan Dan, Aged About 50 Years, B/c Charan R/o Sawan Magra Borunda, Teh. And Dist. Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. N.S. Charan
		Mr. Om Singh Chouhan
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP
		Ms. Priyanka Borana
		Mr. Mahaveer Bhanwariya

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶15

Order

¶16

ORDER PRONOUNCED ON	:::	01/07/2024
ORDER RESERVED ON	:::	16/04/2024

¶17

BY THE COURT:-

¶18

By way of filing the instant Miscellaneous Petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 12-01-2023, passed by the Learned District and Sessions Judge, Balotra in Sessions Case No.75/2022, whereby the application moved on behalf of the Public Prosecutor under Section 193 r.w. Section 209 of the Cr.P.C has been allowed and while taking cognizance of the offence under

¶19

[2024:RJ-JD:25530]

¶20

(2 of 7) [CRLMP-593/2023]

¶21

Sections 498-A and 304-B r.w. Section 120-B of the IPC, a process has been issued against the petitioners.

¶22

Bereft of elaborated details, briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the daughter of the complainant, namely Pratibha, was married to one Kuldeep Singh on 14-05-2021 as per Hindu rituals. She died on 05-03-2022 at her matrimonial home under suspicious circumstances. As per the postmortem report dated 05-03-2022, no external or internal injuries were noticed by the Board duly constituted for the purpose of her autopsy. Since there was no apparent cause of death discernible from the circumstances, therefore, the viscera of the deceased were taken and sent for histopathology and chemical examination. Till the receipt of the report, opinion regarding cause of death was deferred.

¶23

It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased was subjected to maltreatment by her husband, father-in-law, motherin-law, and the present petitioners, who are married sister-in-laws of the deceased. It is alleged that a demand of Honda Amaze Car was raised from her in-laws. After conducting thorough investigation, charge sheet was filed. As per report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., the deceased used to be treated cruelly by her husband, mother-in-law, and father-in-law on account of demand of dowry. The report further revealing that the husband of the deceased used to remain in an inebriated condition and he was not doing any job. Perhaps, it was the main cause of strife

¶24

[2024:RJ-JD:25530]

¶25

(3 of 7) [CRLMP-593/2023]

¶26

between the spouses. After conducting thorough investigation, the investigating agency concluded that the petitioners Khushbu and Mahak, who are married sister-in-laws of the deceased, had no role in respect of the death of the deceased and therefore they were exonerated from the charges and thus, the charge sheet came to be filed only against three persons i.e., the husband, father-in-law, and mother-in-law of the deceased for offence under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the IPC.

¶27

After the submission of the charge sheet, an application was moved on behalf of the Public Prosecutor to arraign the present Petitioner also as an accused, which came to be allowed by the order under challenge.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor, and the counsel for the Complainant and perused the record made available to this court.

¶29

No doubt, it is unfortunate that the deceased ended her life within a year of her marriage at her matrimonial home. The death occurred other than in normal circumstances and there are allegations that she was subjected to cruelty in connection with demand of dowry. It is not in dispute that after conducting a thorough investigation, the present petitioners Smt. Khushbu and Smt. Mahak, who were married prior to the marriage of the deceased with Kuldeep Singh; were residing at their matrimonial home and their visit to the parents' home was seldom. The fact

¶30

[2024:RJ-JD:25530]

¶31

(4 of 7) [CRLMP-593/2023]

¶32

further emanating from the record that the petitioners used to visit their parents home once in a while. The police report completely exonerated the petitioners from the allegations.

¶33

The law in this regard is no more res-integra that the other persons who have not been charge-sheeted by the police can also be arraigned as an accused by exercising power under Section 193 of the Cr.P.C., and the landmark judgment passed in the case of Dharampal and Ors. v. State of Haryana (2014) 3 SCC 306 has made a complete enunciation in this regard. Of course, the Sessions Judge has the authority and power to implead the other person as an accused who have been left out by the police; however, the requisite material must be available on record.

¶34

A presumption of innocence which was already existing in favor of the petitioners has got further fortification by the result of investigation in which they were exonerated. In case of filing a complete negative final report, when a criminal Court proceed to take cognizance and to issue process; it is imperative upon the Court to consider the grounds of the negative final report also before proceeding against the left out accused. In this case, though the learned trial Judge considered the issue related to implication of the petitioners but this aspect has not been considered as to whether there is sufficient material showing complicity of the petitioners in commission of the crime. They are married sisters-in-law of the deceased. They were married prior to the marriage of the deceased. They ordinarily reside at their

¶35

[2024:RJ-JD:25530]

¶36

(5 of 7) [CRLMP-593/2023]

¶37

matrimonial home. The allegations with regard to demand of Honda Amaze car from the deceased by her husband cannot be connected with the petitioners. The fact emanating from the police report showing that the husband of the deceased is a drug addict person and used to remain in an intoxicated condition and often used to treat the deceased cruelly cannot be ignored, even at this stage, since issuance of process against any person to compel him or her to face the rigor of Session’s trial is certainly an infringement to his or her fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of India provided there must be availability of prima facie concrete and positive evidence against his or her involvement.

¶38

A bare look on the record does not reflect direct involvement of the present petitioners in commission of the crime. Simply because their names were mentioned in the FIR and in the statements of some of the witnesses; cannot be a legal ground to implead them as an accused. No specific date, time, incident, or nature of cruelty has been mentioned in the FIR and the statements recorded during investigation. A vague and bald statement should ordinarily be not taken as a piece of evidence to implead a person as an accused, particularly when he or she has been absolved from the charges after a thorough investigation. Even, the learned Sessions Judge has not considered the ground of exoneration of the petitioners by the police which was supposed to be done before issuance of process against the petitioners. A

(6 of 7)

[2024:RJ-JD:25530]

[CRLMP-593/2023]

specific reason of disagreement with the police report must have been shown in the order.

¶43

After minutely going through the niceties of the case, this Court feels that no sufficient material is available on record to arraign the petitioners as an accused by exercising power under Section 193 Cr.P.C. This Court is of the view that the person who has been exonerated from the charges by the police, should not be made as accused by exercising power under Section 193 Cr.P.C., simply upon moving an application on behalf of the prosecution until and unless sufficient material is available on record so as to show their complicity in commission of crime. In this situation the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen under the Constitution of India must be protected Article 21 confers the fundamental right to life and personal liberty of every person, including foreigners, and this right have been given paramount importance by the courts. This right of life and personal liberty enjoy a fundamental ascendancy over all other attributes of the political and social order, and thus, we need to be more sensitive to it than to the other attributes of daily existence because liberty should not be forfeited solely based on any accusation without substance and corroborative material.

¶44

Accordingly, there is a force in the instant Misc. Petition and thus, the same is allowed. The order taking cognizance dated 1201-2023, passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Balotra in Sessions Case No.75/2022 is hereby quashed and set

[2024:RJ-JD:25530]

(7 of 7)

[CRLMP-593/2023]

aside. The trial may proceed against the accused who have been charg-sheeted by the police. Nothing will preclude the prosecution to move an application under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. at an appropriate stage if sufficient material is available on record to invoke exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. as enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court time and again.

¶49

The S.B. Criminal Misc (Pet.) No. 593/2023 and Stay Petition are disposed off.

¶50

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶51

349-Mamta/-

Smt. Khushbu v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Khushbu v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahendra Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramzan Vs State of Rajasthan

Kanhaiya Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Himmatha Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Prem a Devidayal and Anr. Vs State

Jai Karan Vs State and Anr.