Petitioners were released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds after being arrested for dowry death under Section 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.: High court of Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.376920 Arising Out of PS. Case No. 97 Year 2020 Thana SHERGHATI District Gaya 1. Gangotri Devi aged about 40 yearswife of Sri Mohan Yadav. 2. Mohan Yadav aged about 45 yearsson of Sri Bachan Yadav Both resident of village Milkibag P.S. Sherghati District Gaya ... Petitioner s The State of Bihar For the Petitioner s For the State Mr. Vikram Deo Singh Advocate Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal APP CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ... Opposite Party s Date : 20 07 2021 The matter has been heard via video conferencing 2. Heard Mr. Vikam Deo Singh learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State 3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Sherghati PS Case No. 920 dated 02.03.2020 instituted under Section 304 B 34 of the Indian Penal Code 4. The allegation against the petitioners who are the mother in law and father in law of the deceased who was daughter of the informant is of strangulating her due to non fulfillment of demand of money for purchasing a milch cow. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.376920 dt.20 07 2021 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the marriage took place six years back and there are two male children born out of the wedlock and this itself would falsify the allegation of demand of any money. Learned counsel submitted that as per the FIR itself the informant has alleged that fifteen days prior to the date of occurrence the deceased had informed him that the petitioners and another co accused had physically assaulted the deceased threatening her to flee away otherwise they would kill her but neither any step having been taken by her nor complain made anywhere clearly falsifies such allegation. Further it was submitted that in the postmortem report it has only come that there was ligature mark on the neck which was caused due to hanging leading to asphyxia and no other antemortem injury on the body has been found. Thus it was submitted that the allegation of assault is falsified. Learned counsel submitted that surprisingly the son of the petitioner who is the husband of the deceased has not been made accused Learned counsel submitted that he lives in Patiala and the deceased was wanting her husband to take her to Patiala due to which there was differences between the couple and on the fateful day also what transpired between them is not known to the petitioners and that she had taken her life as no mark of any Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.376920 dt.20 07 2021 resistance or any assault or any forcible action has been found on the body during postmortem. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent and further that it cannot be believed that only due to lack of bringing money for purchase of a milch cow such extreme step would be taken especially when there are two minor sons of the deceased and the father of the children was living outside the state. It was submitted that there has been no complaint made before any authority with regard to any torture or demand of dowry earlier and thus the same at this stage after the deceased having taken her life is clearly mala fide and to harass the petitioners for oblique reasons. 6. Learned APP submitted that the allegation is that the petitioners had strangulated the deceased due to non fulfillment of demand of money for purchasing a milch cow. 7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25 000 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and furtherthat one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners that the petitioners and the bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the petitioners andthat the petitioners shall cooperate with the Court and police prosecution. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or undertaking or failure to cooperate shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds. 8. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioners to the notice of the Court concerned which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners 9. The petition stands disposed off in the (Ahsanuddin Amanullah J J. Alam 

Summary: The petitioner was arrested under Section 304-BIPC, “Dowry death, where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage if she was subjected to cruelty or har­assment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called “dowry death”, Section 34 IPC, “Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.” This is in connection with Sherghati PS Case No. 97 of 2020 dated 02.03.2020 This Judgment was given in the high court of Judicature at Patna on the 20th of July 2021 by the honorable Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah in the case of Gangotri Devi Versus the state of Bihar criminal miscellaneous No.37698 of 2020, Mr. Vikram represented as the advocate for the petitioner and Ms. Veena Kumari represented as the additional Public Prosecutor for the state of Bihar, the proceedings of the court were held through video conference. The following are the facts of the case, the petitioners were accused of strangulating their daughter-in-law (now deceased) due to non-fulfillment of demand of money for purchasing a milch cow. Therefore the informant (father of the deceased filed a case for dowry death). The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the marriage took place six years back and the couple had two male children which would falsify the allegation for the demand of money. The counsel submitted that according to the FIR the informant stated that 15 days prior to the death of his daughter, the deceased had been physically assaulted and was threatened to be killed, but since no step has been taken such allegation is false. It was further submitted that in the postmortem report, there was a ligature mark on the neck which was clearly caused due to hanging which leads to asphyxia and no other injury was found on her body, therefore the allegations against the petitioners were falsely implicated. The counsel brought to light the fact that the husband of the deceased was not accused and since there were differences between the couple and what transpired between them is not known to the petitioners and she committed suicide and there is no mark of any assault or any forcible action was found on the body during the postmortem, therefore, petitioners cannot be held liable for the same. The counsel held that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent and no previous complaint made before any authority with regard to torture or demand for dowry or cruelty. The additional Public prosecutor submitted that the petitioners must not be given bail as they had strangulated the deceased because she did not fulfill the demand of money for purchasing a milch cow and the death was caused within six years of marriage under section 304 B IPC is clearly stated seven years, therefore, it is a definite picture of dowry death. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case the court held that the petitioners will be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties to the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.c., 1973  “(i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners, (ii) that the petitioners and the bailors shall execute the bond and give an undertaking with regard to the good behavior of the petitioners, and (iii) that the petitioners shall cooperate with the Court and police/prosecution.”