IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M). No. 123 of 2011. Reserved on : 10.03.2011. Date of Decision: 16.03.2011. ______________________________________________ Jeet Ram. ….Petitioner. Versus. State of H.P. ….Respondent. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?. No. For the petitioner :Mr. G.D.Verma,Sr.Advocate with Mr. B.C.Verma, Advocate. For the Respondent. :Mr. P.K.Sharma, Addl. Advocate General with Ms.Shubh Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud, J. This bail petition has been preferred by the petitioner, who has been accused of offences under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code in FIR No.26/2011, registered at Police Station, Rampur Bushahr. Prior to the present application, the petitioner had instituted a petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahr on 14.02.2011 which was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge on 23.02.2011. 2. The case as pleaded before the learned Sessions Judge was that the deceased daughter-in-law of the petitioner Whether reporters of the Local Papers are allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 was a patient of depression. She consumed some poison and committed suicide which was not attributable to any act on the part of the petitioner. He has been in custody since 24.1.2011 and he seeks direction for release on bail. 3. It is undisputed that the FIR was lodged on the complaint of Shri Murat Singh, father of the deceased Asha Devi. It was alleged that around four years prior to her death, she had been married to Pramod Kumar, son of the petitioner and out of the wedlock, one daughter was born. The deceased was residing with her in-laws in their house. The allegation against the petitioner, who is father-in-law of the deceased, is that he used to quarrel with her and had nefarious designs on her inasmuch as he wanted to have sexual relations with her. The deceased disclosed this fact to her mother Reena Devi and her sister. It was the totality of this behaviour that compelled the deceased to end her life. The learned Court notice that two statements made by namely one Smt.Reena Devi, the mother of the deceased and secondly by Smt. Kirna Devi sister of the deceased clearly point out to the allegation that the petitioner wanted to establish illicit relations with the deceased. The learned Court also noticed that in the statement of Pramod Kumar, husband of the deceased, there is no allegation that the deceased-wife was suffering from depression and for which reason she committed suicide etc. The Court, considering the gravity of the charge against the petitioner, proceeded to dismiss the application. The subsequent application has now been moved by the petitioner before this Court. One of the 3 allegations is that Asha Devi deceased was a patient of depression. The case which has been instituted is false and the story of the prosecution that the petitioner was making advances to her asking her for sexual favours is not established on the record and has been cooked up. Had this been the case, she would have complained to her husband of her mother-in-law with whom she was residing all alone. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General, who opposed the grant of bail, more so, on the basis of the allegations made that the conduct of the petitioner was such that the deceased had no other option but to end her life. 5. At this stage, it would not be proper for this Court to analyze the evidence minutely. But, it is only the prima facie case against the petitioner which has to be considered. Adverting to the fact as to whether the deceased was a patient of depression or not, I find from the order of the learned Court below that there is no evidence till now on record to establish this fact. The learned Court rightly holds that even the husband of the deceased or the other witnesses whose statements have been recorded, have not stated one word about this. There is also no material on the record to show that she was undergoing medical treatment for this ailment. On the second aspect, whether the acts of the petitioner amount to cruelty or not, what I find from the record is that, prima facie, two statements, one of the mother of the deceased and second of her sister point out to the fact that the 4 petitioner was looking for sexual favours from her. Why she did not disclose this fact to her husband or to her mother-in-law which has yet to be established by evidence and then the comparative merits of the allegations have to be judged. At this stage, what I find is that there is no change of circumstances calling upon me to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 439 of the Code. The principles for grant of bail are by now well established which include not only the gravity of the offence but also prima facie case has to be made out against the accused or not. What I find from the material on record at this stage that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are of a serious nature and it cannot be said that they are totally unsubstantiated. In these circumstances, I find no merit in this petition which is dismissed. The dismissal of this petition shall not preclude the petitioner from moving the Trial Court and this Court in the changed circumstances. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. 16th March, 2011. (krt)