IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,SHIMLA. 1.Cr.M.P.(M) No 647 2011 2.Cr.MP(M) No. 648 of 2011. Date of decision: 30.08.2011. _______________________________________________________ 1. Partha Sarth Nanda ….. Applicant. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. …. Respondent. ________________________________________________________ 2. Anupama Nanda ….Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. …. Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No For the Applicant(s) : Mr. Satyen Vaidya, Advocate and Mr. Ajay Kochhar, Advocate. ( in both the petitions) For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl.Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General. (in both the petitions) Kuldip Singh, J (Oral) This judgment shall dispose of Cr.MP(M) No.647 of 2011 and Cr.MP(M) No.648 of 2011 as both the petitions have arisen from FIR No.177/11 dated 18.8.2011, registered at Police Station, Dhalli under Sections 498A, 306. Cr.MP(M) No.647 of 2011 has been filed by husband and Cr.MP(M) No.648 of 2011 has been filed by the mother-in-law of the deceased. The Status report has been filed in Cr.MP(M) No.647 of 2011. I have gone through the status report. Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes …2… 2. It has been stated in the applications that according to the police Minakshi Nanda wife of petitioner in Cr.MP(M) No.647 of 2011 committed suicide by jumping in the river Satluj on 18.8.2011. The petitioner in Cr.MP(M) No.647 of 2011 immediately rushed to Suni and tried to locate his wife alongwith friends and relatives. It has been alleged that the case has been registered at the instance of relative of Minakshi Nanda. The facts have been distorted after the unfortunate incident. 3. The petitioner in Cr.MP(M) No.647 of 2011 got married with the deceased on 6.2.2003 and son Jai was born from the wedlock on 30.12.2005. The deceased was employed as a teacher in Government School, Kawarag, District Solan. The husband and wife were living together since 2003. 4. On 18.8.2011 the deceased left for the school early in the morning. The husband was at his residence when around 1 p.m. He received a call from his wife telling that she had gone. On inquiry where she was going, the wife switched off the mobile phone. The husband thereafter kept on making calls to his wife on her mobile number but every time the answer was that mobile was switched off. The husband rushed to the place of posting of his wife to know about the whereabouts but he was told that she had not attended the school on that day. In the meantime the call of the petitioner was matured on the telephone of his wife which was with the police, who in turn directed the petitioner to come to police post, Suni and told that his wife ended her life by jumping in river Satluj. …3… 5. The petitioners are innocent. They have committed no offence. The deceased was hypersensitive and was under depression after the death of her father in the year 2007. The deceased was under stress and depression due to illness of the husband also. The deceased had attack of such depression in the year 2008 and she was taken to IGMC for treatment. The deceased was on medication. 6. The petitioners are ready to join the investigation. The custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not necessary. They are ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of the Court, if they are released on bail. There is no body to look after the son Jai who is about 5 ½ years old. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioners on bail. 7. The bail applications have been opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General on the basis of status report. The case has been registered on the basis of complaint of Vijay Laxmi mother of deceased Minakshi. It has been alleged that after the marriageof deceased on 6.2.2003 the in-laws of the deceased started torturing physically and mentally to the deceased. She was even admitted in IGMC, Shimla. It has been alleged that the deceased on 17.8.2011 told her mother that her mother-in-law etc. tortured her. On 18.8.2011 the complainant received a phone from the mother-in-law of the deceased that the deceased had been missing. The complainant contacted her son-in-law but whereabouts of her daughter could not be traced. The complainant tried to contact her daughter on phone but she could not contact her. At about 4.30 p.m. some body …4… responded the phone and told that the deceased had jumped in river at Suni. It has been alleged that the deceased had taken the extreme step due to the torture of the in-laws. The prayer has been made for dismissing the petitions. 8. I have heard both the sides and perused the police file. In the police file there is an alleged suicide note dated 17.8.2011 of Minakshi in which concern has been shown regarding her son. It will not be proper to comment upon the suicide note at this stage. In the daily diary No.48A dated 1.2.2011 of Police Station West, Shimla recorded at the instance of Minakshi Nanda it has been stated that her husband was not able to maintain amicable relations with her and used vulgar language. In that report allegation of demand of dowry has not been made. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that deceased was under depression on account of death of her father and illness of the petitioner. The deceased in the past was admitted in IGMC for treatment. The petitioner In Cr.MP(M) No.648 of 2011 is a woman and therefore, she is entitled to special benefit provided for woman for bail under Section 437 Cr.P.C. Thus keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case the petitioners have made out a case for grant of bail in FIR No.177/11 dated 18.8.2011, registered at Police Station, Dhalli under Sections 498A, 306 IPC. 9. In these circumstances CMP(M) Nos. 647 and 648 of 2011 are allowed. In the event of arrest, both the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in FIR No.177/11 dated 18.8.2011, registered at Police Station, Dhalli Under Sections 498A and 306 IPC, …5… on furnishing their personal bonds in the sum of ` 25,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, with the condition that the petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. 10. The observations made in the judgment are for disposal of the bail applications and shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Copy ‘Dasti’. August 30, 2011. (Kuldip Singh), (sks) Judge. …6… IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.648 of 2011. Date of decision: 30.8.2011. Anupama Nanda ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?2 For the petitioner : Mr. Satyen Vaidy, Advocate and Mr. Ajay Kochhar, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, J (Oral) For judgment, see judgment rendered in Cr.MP(M) No.647 of 2011, titled as Partha Sarth Nanda vs. State of H.P. ( Kuldip Singh ), Judge. August 30, 2011 (sks) Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?