IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.Ms. No. 801, 802, 803 and 804 of 2008. Decided on 18.8.2008. __________________________________________________ Vidya Devi … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. … Respondent. ________________________________________________________ Jagdish Kumar … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. … Respondent. ________________________________________________ Devi Singh … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. … Respondent. _________________________________________________ Palas Ram … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. … Respondent. _________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’bl Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. B. Ahuja, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl.A.G. and Mr. Vikas Rathor, Dy.A.G. _________________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge. This order shall dispose of bail petitions being Cr.M.P.Ms. No. 801, 802, 803 and 804 of 2008, which arise out of FIR No. 189 of 2008 registered on 15.5.2008 at Police Station, Sadar, Bilaspur under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC. The respondent-State has filed the status report. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 I have heard the learned counsel and have perused the record produced by the Investigating Officer. The case of the prosecution in nut-shell is that on the basis of statement of complainant Mehar Singh, FIR No. 189 of 2008 was registered on 15.5.2008. According to his version, his younger brother-Kaul Dass was serving in Electricity Board and has retired in the year 2003. His brother was married to Smt. Savitri Devi about 35 years ago and he had constructed a double storeyed building at village Dhanoh. His brother has kept another woman Smt. Vidya Devi. She is one of the petitioners. Smt. Vidya Devi and Smt. Savitri Devi have strained relations. Complainant’s brother-Kaul Dass has no issue from his wives. Petitioner-Vidya Devi was living with him at village Dhanoh. He had adopted Narender Kaur as his daughter. According to the statement of the complainant, petitioner-Vidya Devi used to maltreat Kaul Dass. She was insisting that the moveable/immoveable property be transferred in her name. It is further averred in the complaint that due to cruelty on the part of Smt. Vidya Devi, his bother has committed suicide. Kaul Dass has committed suicide by hanging. A suicide note was recovered from the wooden box. The accused were arrested on 15.5.2008. Doctor has opined that the deceased has died due to strangulation as a result of cloth hanging. The petitioners, Jagdish Kumar, Devi Singh and Palas Ram had earlier filed applications before the learned Sessions 3 Judge on 16.6.2008. These applications were rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. These three applicants had approached this Court by way of Cr.M.P.Ms. No. 718, 719 and 720 of 2008. These applications were rejected by this Court on 22.7.2008. Smt. Vidya Devi had not approached the learned Sessions Judge. She has filed the present application before this Court for the first time. Mr. B. Ahuja, learned counsel for the petitioners has strenuously argued that his clients have been falsely implicated in the case. He has submitted that the version of the prosecution is unbelievable. He finally contended that the investigation is complete and the challan has been put up. The trial of the case is likely to take some time. The learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail applications. Applicant-Vidya Devi is aged about 65 years. Mr. B. Ahuja, Advocate has submitted that the Court has to take into consideration the age of the applicant. The challan has been put up in the present case. The report of the Doctor has been obtained and the suicide note has already been recovered, as noticed above. I have gone through the contents of the suicide note carefully. It has come in the record, as noticed above, that deceased Kaul Dass had two wives. Smt. Vidya Devi is his second wife. It appears that the relations between the 4 petitioner-Vidya Devi and Smt. Savitri Devi were not cordial. Kaul Dass had no issue from these two wives. He has adopted one Narender Kaur. According to complainant Mehar Singh, Smt. Savitri Devi had gone to her parents’ house at Hamirpur. Kaul Dass had contracted marriage with the petitioner 32 years back. It has been stated in the suicide note that the petitioner- Vidya Devi was quarrelsome lady and had been quarrelling with his relations as well as son in law. The marriage between deceased-Kaul Dass and the petitioner-Vidya Devi lasted for 32 years. There are no instances when she had quarrelled with the relations and son in law-Kaul Dass. From the facts, it appears to be a case of normal family dispute between Smt. Vidya Devi and Smt. Savitri Devi. Petitioner-Vidya Devi, as noticed above, is 65 years of age and no useful purpose will be served by keeping her behind the bars. The learned Additional Advocate General has strenuously argued that the applications preferred by Jagdish Kumar, Devi Singh and Palas Ram had already been rejected by this Court and no new ground, as subsequent development, has been stated in the fresh applications. Mr. B. Ahuja, Advocate to the contrary has submitted that this Court has not taken into consideration that these persons are permanent residents of village Khola in Tehsil Kotkhai and were not at all involved in the instigation/abetment of the suicide of Kaul Dass. He has relied upon the case Kalyan Chandra Sarkar V. 5 Rajesh Rajan, AIR 2004 SC 1866. It is in this background that these applications are considered. In these three applications, it is specifically stated that these petitioners are residing in Tehsil Kotkhai. This ground has bearing on this application. This Court will consider the fresh ground taken by the applicants in their applications after the rejection of their earlier applications. The Court has to consider the motives attributed to the three petitioners, namely; Jagdish Kumar, Devi Singh and Palas Ram in the suicide note. These three accused are not residing in village Dhanoh. There is no evidence brought on record that they are permanent residents of village Dhanoh, District Bilaspur, H.P. Mr. B. Ahuja, on the other hand, had argued that these three accused persons belonged to village Khola, Tehsil Kotkhai, District Shimla. In the suicide note though these three persons are named, however, nothing has been brought on record to prima facie establish that these persons had caused cruelty to the deceased-Kaul Dass. The prosecution has failed to show how these persons have abetted commission of suicide. No motives have been imputed to these three persons why they would aid or instigate or abet the deceased-Kaul Dass to commit suicide. These persons are residing in village Khola, Tehsil Kotkhai, District Shimla. The prosecution has not 6 produced any evidence to show that at any given time these persons had been visiting village Dhanoh. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners have made out a case for the grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.. Accordingly, these applications are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 189 of 2008 registered on 15th May, 2008 at Police Station, sadar, Bilaspur under Sections 306 read with Section 34 IPC on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- each with one surety in the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur. The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. The observations made hereinabove shall have no expression/opinion on the merits of the case. Copy ‘Dasti’ on usual terms. (Rajiv Sharma), J. August 18, 2008. (cr)