IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-32209 OF 2010 Date of decision : 10.11.2010 Rinki ….. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …… Respondent Present : Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.C. Berry, Addl. A.G., Punjab. **** S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against her for the offences under Sections 306 and 34 IPC. The FIR (Annexure P1) in the case has been registered on the statement of Ashwani Kumar son of late Ram Murti. It is alleged by the complainant Ashwani Kumar that his father are three brothers. The eldest one namely Ram Murti (father of the complainant) was residing separately from the other brothers namely Garib Dass (deceased) and Mangat Ram who were residing together. Ram Murti, father of the complainant had died about 7-8 years ago. The uncle of the complainant namely Garib Dass (deceased) had two children i.e. one son and one daughter. His (Complainant’s) other uncle namely Mangat Ram had a son namely Rohit who was married 8-9 years back with Rinki (petitioner). There was a matrimonial dispute between Rohit and Rinki (petitioner). Rinki (petitioner) had filed an application dated 2.6.2010 (Annexure P2) before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala against CRM No. M-32209 OF 2010 [2] her husband namely Rohit, his father Mangat Ram his uncle Garib Dass (deceased) and Roop Rani wife of Garib Dass; besides, Darshana Devi, father’s sister (Bua) of Rohit in the Women Cell, Patiala. A compromise (Annexure P3) was reached at on 21.6.2010. According to the compromise, Rinki (petitioner) was to stay in the house of Rohit at Lalru. On 22.6.2010, Rinki (petitioner) sent an SMS to Rohit that she would not come to his house in compelling circumstances which should be kept in mind. Rohit, however, did not disclose this to anyone. According to the compromise; Rohit, the uncle of the complainant namely Mangat Ram and Pawan Kumar son of Ram Kishan who is the brother in distant relationship went to the parental house of Rinki (petitioner) in order to bring her back. It is submitted that Rinki (petitioner) was in fact never harassed in any manner by the family members of the uncle of the complainant. Rinki (petitioner) in connivance with her sister Jyoti and mother Raj Rani moved an application in Women Cell, Patiala making false allegations against the family members of the uncle of the complainant, due to which Garib Dass (deceased) was under severe mental tension. On 26.6.2010, Garib Dass came to know about the SMS sent by the petitioner Rinki to Rohit, due to which, he was gripped under further mental tension. When Rohit and others went to Patiala for bringing Rinki (petitioner) back home, Garib Dass, the uncle of the complainant, due to mental tension, strangulated himself with a girder in his own house. When the aunt of the complainant namely Bachni Devi wife of Mangat Ram saw all this, she rushed out in the street and raised an alarm. Their neighbour namely Mahipal and the complainant’s son namely Pankaj then brought Garib Dass down who had hung himself. The complainant after arranging a vehicle along with his neighbour Mahipal brought Garib Dass to Hospital at Ambala for medical treatment. When they reached near Jhurmuri at about 11.00 a.m., Garib Dass CRM No. M-32209 OF 2010 [3] passed away. They brought his dead body back and called back Rohit etc. by making a phone call. Garib Dass, uncle of the complainant committed suicide due to mental tension caused by the false application moved by the petitioner Rinki, her sister Jyoti and their mother Raj Rani in Women Cell, Patiala. A hand written note was found from the pocket of the deceased Garib Dass on which he had recorded that he was disheartened by Rinki, her sister Jyoti and their mother Raj Rani who had made their life a hell. They had never gone to the Police Station but they were made to appear before the Women Cell which had depressed him. Therefore, he committed suicide. It is alleged that Rinki (petitioner), her sister Jyoti and their mother Raj Rani were demanding `2 lacs in lieu of divorce which they were ready to pay them, but even then they (petitioner and her sister and mother) did not stop from causing harassment to them. Not being able to bear the setback, he (Garib Dass) had taken the step. The complainant got his statement recorded and requested that action be taken. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner Rinki is a young girl of 23 years of age and she cannot be said to have abetted the commission of alleged suicide by Garib Dass. It is submitted that the matrimonial dispute had been compromised on 21.6.2010 and a compromise (Annexure P3) was recorded. It is submitted that the petitioner in fact was not to pursue her complaint (Annexure P2) and, therefore, had effected a compromise. As such it cannot be said that she is in any manner is responsible. In response, learned State counsel has submitted that Garib Dass (deceased) had recorded a suicide note which was recovered from his person. It is submitted that the said suicide note was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the result of the examination has been received. It has been opined that all the significant features as occurring CRM No. M-32209 OF 2010 [4] in the question like signatures and writings stamped and marked as Q1 to Q3 were found similarly exemplified at one or the other place in the standard signatures. The Assistant Director Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab Chandigarh did not find any characteristic difference between them. The similarity found between the questioned and standard signatures were significant and sufficient and when considered collectively led her to the information of their common authorship. It is also submitted that the petitioner despite settling the claim in the Women Cell had sent the SMS to Rohit that she would not come back and it is when Garib Dass came to know about the SMS on 26.6.2010 that he committed suicide. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the marriage of petitioner Rinki was solemnized with Rohit who is a nephew of the deceased Garib Dass. There was a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and her husband Rohit. The petitioner had made a complaint against Rohit and his other family members including Garib Dass (deceased). The matter though had been settled by way of a compromise (Annexure P3) in the Women Cell, Patiala. However, on 22.6.2010 the petitioner sent a SMS that she would not live with Rohit. Rohit initially did not disclose this to anyone. However, on 26.6.2010 Rohit, his father Mangat Ram and some other persons had gone to the parental house of the petitioner Rinki to bring her back. On the same day, Garib Dass came to know of the SMS and he committed suicide. The mobile phone from which the message was sent is to be recovered. The facts and circumstances of the case are to be investigated by the police for which her custodial interrogation is necessary. It is well known that considerations governing the Courts decision on an application seeking pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC are materially different from that seeking post-arrest bail or for that CRM No. M-32209 OF 2010 [5] matter even seeking suspension of sentence pending appeal before a higher Court. In case of pre-arrest bail the advantage of custodial interrogation for the purpose of eliciting more and useful information and material is to be kept in view. Besides, the exercise of power to grant pre-arrest bail is somewhat extraordinary in character. In the facts and circumstances, no ground for grant of pre- arrest bail is made out. Accordingly, the Crl. Misc. petition is dismissed. However, in case the petitioner surrenders before the police within 3 days from the receipt of copy of this order, her application for regular bail shall be considered by the concerned Court within 3 days of its filing after excluding the period of police remand, if any. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE November 10, 2010 amit