Gujarat High Court

Khimiben vs State Of Gujarat And Anr. on 22 August, 1991

Equivalent citations: 1992CRILJ1994

ORDER

K.J. Vaidya, J.

1. Khimiben Arjanbhai -- the mother of the unfortunate deceased Rasilaben, who allegedly came to be roasted alive by her husband Ukabhai alias Haribhai, has by this Misc. Criminal Application Under
Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, moved this court praying for quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated 9-7-1991 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kutch at Bhuj, granting anticipatory bail of the respondent-accused.

2. According to the FIR filed by the petitioner-Khimiben, the incident in question wherein her daughter Rasila was burnt alive by her husband Ukabhai -- the respondent herein, within four weeks of her marriage, took place at 8-30 a.m. on 14-6-1991 at the residence of her in-laws at village Shinay, Taluka -- Anjar. According to the petitioner, the deceased Rasila who married on 17-5-1991 to the respondent who was graduate in Civil Engineering. At the time of her marriage, whatever possible within the financial means of petitioner's family was given to Rasila in 'Kariyavar'. Further according to the petitioner, at the time of marriage, the respondent was unemployed and therefore he was in search of some job. After the marriage, on 29-5-1991, the respondent alongwith his wife Rasila went to Ahmedabad to give interview for the post of Junior Engineer in G.S.T.R. Corporation, where they stayed at the residence of Dayaram Bhambhani -- the brother of the deceased. On 3-6-1991 they returned from Ahmedabad to their village Shinay on the morning of 4-6-1991. On the very day at 4-00 p.m. they went to Anjar to meet the petitioner and family members, where the respondent staying there for some time, returned alone to village Shinay. It was at this stage that the deceased Rasila for the first time revealed her sufferings to the petitioner narrating how she was subjected to the mental torture by the respondent who was persistently demanding a T.V. and also Rs. 10,000/- for securing a job asking her to manage the same from her parents. The petitioner thereupon consoling her assured that since her sons and husband were not at home, the moment they would come, she would talk to them and the things demanded would be managed for her. About six days thereafter on 10-6-1991 at about 5-00 p.m. the respondent came to Anjar to pick up his wife Rasila and after staying for few hours, both of them returned to village Shinay. On 14-6-1991, at 10-30 a.m. Shantilal one of the sons of the petitioner coming home informed the petitioner that Rasila was burnt and was removed to Rambag Hospital at Adipur. Thereupon the petitioner immediately rushed to the said Hospital in a Rickshaw, where she was joined by her husband and son Shantilal. On going to the Ladies Ward, Rasila was found to be admitted as an indoor patient with burns all over her body, and one Jadiben -- her sister-in-law and some other ladies were sitting by her bed side. On seeing Rasila, the petitioner inquired of her as to what had happened, to which Rasila first by gestures suggested that let the ladies sitting nearby her be first asked to go out. Thereupon the petitioner requested the said ladies to go out. When the ladies went out of the room, Rasila informed the petitioner to the effect that immediately after when she and her husband returned to village Shinay on 10-6-1991, the respondent started giving her mental torture by questioning her as to why she had not brought the T.V. and also the amount of Rs. 10,000/- as was asked for from her parental house. She further stated that today also in the morning at 8-30 a.m. the respondent picked up the quarrel with her for the T.V. and the amount of Rs. 10,000/- and thereafter, closing the Deli (gate) dousing her with the Kerosene had set her ablaze by applying a lighted match-stick for the purpose of killing her. She further stated that no attempts were made to extinguish the fire, rather the respondent sat quietly on the cot and witnessing her all in flames. Rasila further stated that at the time of the incident, her parent-in-laws were not in the house. Thereafter, at about 12-00 noon, Rasila was removed to Bhuj in an ambulance van for further treatment, and the petitioner along with her son Shantilal and other relatives accompanied her. At about 1-15 p.m. they reached Bhuj Hospital where Rasila during the course of her treatment succumbed to burns injuries and passed away at about 4-45 p.m. After the P.M. examination was over, the dead body of Rasila was handed over to the petitioner, which was carried to Anjar at about 8-30 p.m. Thereafter one Fojdar from Adipur visited the residence of the petitioner, however since she was shocked and dazed under the bereavement, she was not in a position to give her statement. On the basis of the above information given by Rasila at Adipur Hospital, on the next day i.e. on 15-6-1991, at about 8-30 p.m. the petitioner filed a regular complaint before the Dy. Superintendent of Police, Eastern Division, Anjar, against the respondent for the alleged offences Under
Sections 302
and
498-A
of IPC and also Under
Section 4
of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 which came to be registered as I. CR No. 54/91, Adipur Police Station.

3. It appears from the FIR that despite the serious allegations against the respondent, he was not arrested by the police. It further appears that on 26-6-1991 the respondent filed a Misc. Criminal Application No. 283/ 91 before the learned Sessions Judge Kuta at Bhuj and obtained anticipatory bail on 9-7-1991. It is against this order granting the anticipatory bail to the respondent, that the aggrieved petitioner who happens to be mother of the deceased, has moved this court for cancellation of the same by filing the present Misc. Criminal Application on 15-7-1991.

4. Mr. A.D. Shah, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has raised the following contentions while challenging the impugned order granting anticipatory bail. They are --

(i) that the discretion exercised by the learned Judge while releasing the respondent on anticipatory bail is on face of it perverse and therefore deserves to be quashed and set aside;

(ii) that having regard to the following telltale facts and circumstances of the case on the record, the learned Judge ought not to have released the respondent on anticipatory bail. Those circumstances are --

(a) that this was a serious case of a bride burning on account of dowry demand not satisfied by the deceased-wife;

(b) That the death of Rasila had taken place within four weeks of her marriage;

(c) That too at the house of her in-laws;

(d) That the police surprisingly for whatever reasons did not arrest the respondent. Not only that but the police appears to have given more than sufficient time to the respondent to move the learned Sessions Judge for obtaining anticipatory bail;

(e) That immediate investigation in such type of cases depending upon the circumstantial evidence is inevitably must and yet the respondent was not arrested to the detriment of prosecution interest;

(f) That the Supreme Court in the case of Samundar Singh v. State of Rajasthan, , has clearly warned the courts not to release the accused in a bride burning case on anticipatory bail, particularly when the investigation is in progress, yet strangely, the learned judge has ignored the said warning;

(g) That the reply affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer objecting to the granting of the anticipatory bail as supported by yet another affidavit pointing out some concrete and deliberate attempts to interfere with the investigation, yet the same were ignored by the learned Judge;

(h) That the learned Judge has materially erred in ignoring the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Samundar Singh (Supra) cited before him as well as the affidavits objecting the granting of the anticipatory bail, while deciding the anticipatory bail application of the respondent. Had the Supreme Court decision in the case of Samundar Singh (supra) and the two affidavits on record been taken into consideration, the same perhaps would have tilted the balance in favour of the prosecution by denying the anticipatory bail;

(i) That the reasons given by the learned Judge in para 6 of the judgment while granting the anticipatory bail are patently improper and unjust and cannot be sustained for a while. To quote the same --

(a) That the observation to the effect that -- "Primafacie, it appears that the case may be of accidental death" is un-called for when the investigation is yet to begin.

(b) That the observation to the effect that -- "The dying declaration of the deceased before the Executive Magistrate is correct or false is not to be evaluated at this stage". Here also when circumstances emerging from the investigation papers cast serious doubts about the correctness of the dying declaration, then during the stage of investigation, the learned Judge ought not to have considered the said dying declaration for refusing or granting the anticipatory bail.

(c) That the observation to the effect that -- "It also appears that the main complainant is making serious efforts to see that the accused is not released on bail and in view of those circumstances it cannot be accepted at this stage that the applicant (accused) might have got up dying declaration or that might be false." Merely because the original complainant took some steps to point out the relevant material suggesting falsity or fabrication of written dying declaration and also taking steps to see that liberty of accused may not hamper the investigation, the same can never be treated as a relevant consideration for granting the anticipatory bail. This observation, on face of it is totally irrelevant and extraneous consideration.

(d) That the observation to the effect that -- "Even the applicant (accused) also received injuries due to burns and his submission that he had tried to extinguish the deceased in flames, is supported by those burns injuries. While making this observation, the learned Judge does not appear to have considered the nature and percentage of the burns and parts of the body where such burns were received.

(3) That the observation to the effect that--

Considering all facts, the death of the deceased is more probable due to accidental burning and that there was strong prima facie evidence for that." Here also, the learned Judge ought not to have expressed his views on this aspect while considering the anticipatory bail application particularly when the investigation was pending and the Panchnama of the scene of the offence was clearly falsifying the alleged dying declarations.

(f) That the observation to the effect that --"The accused is a Civil Engineer and has good reputation in the society and if he is arrested, he is likely to be harassed and harm his reputation." This circumstance standing by itself cannot have any bearing while granting the anticipatory bail in bride burning case wherein the investigation is in progress.

(iv) That the learned Judge failed to consider that the investigation was in progress and the alleged dying declarations were inconsistent and contradictory to the facts and situation recorded in the Panchnama. The first dying declaration before the Medical Officer at Rambag Hospital reads -- "Rasila received burns while preparing tea." Similarly, the second dying declaration before the Executive Magistrate reads -- "when she was cooking vegetables on primas she was filling kerosene in Primas and on catching fire, she received the burns. Thus, these two dying declarations are inconsistent.

(v) That the Panchnama of the scene of offence reflects that --

(a) there was one stove of Ashok make lying on sides.

(b) There was Kneaded flour was lying in steel utensils.

(c) one steel container with flour was in that utensils.

(d) One steel utensil containing cooked rice. This was positive finding at the time of Panchnama. The following things were not found at the time of Panchnama --

(a) No vessel or utensil containing mixture of tea preparation.

(b) No vegetable cut or prepared for cocking.

(c) No container containing kerosene to fill up stove.

(d) No funnel found near the stove.

(e) No cap or cover of Ashok Stove found near the stove.

Thus, the contemporaneous record prepared at the scene of offence destroys the dying declaration before the Executive Magistrate or before the Medical Officer.

5. Mr. P.S. Champaneri, the learned A.P.P. for the State has also while tendering the reply affidavit filed by the investigating agency, has vehemently urged for the cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the respondent.

6. As against the above, Mr. J.G. Shah, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent has submitted that there can not be any straight jacket formula that whenever any allegation of bride burning on the ground of Dowry death is made against any husband, the court must, as a matter of course, reject the anticipatory bail application. According to Mr. J.G. Shah, to say so would be putting the absolute fetters on the judicial discretion of the trial court. Mr. Shah further submitted that bail order is after all a discretionary order and looking to the reasons given by the learned Judge, it cannot be said that the same is so unreasonable that it requires any interference.

7. Now having heard the learned advocates at the Bar, before this court sets out to give its reasons for quashing and setting aside the impugned order, it may be stated at the very outset that the submissions made by Mr. A.D. Shah have considerable force and therefore merit acceptance.

8. To start with, out of several contentions raised by Mr. A.D. Shah, two of them are quite disturbing and therefore call for immediate consideration. They are -- (i) quite inconceivable and indiscreet attitude of the investigating agency in not immediately apprehending the respondent-accused despite serious allegation against him of burning his wife for not satisfying the dowry demand, and (ii) the learned Judge not taking into consideration the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Samudarsinh (1987 Cri LJ 705) (Supra) sounding serious note of caution to all courts in matter of granting anticipatory bail to the accused in cases of dowry death which though specifically cited at the Bar and applicable with all force to the facts and circumstances of the present case.

8-1. First of all, it is simply difficult to understand as to how and why despite serious allegation in FIR against the respondent of causing dowry death of Rasilaben by setting her on fire at her in-laws house and that too within four weeks of her marriage and made by no less a person than mother of the deceased, on the basis of the oral Dying Declaration before her, the investigating agency did not think it proper to immediately arrest the respondent for the purposes of indepth investigation. In this regard, we may just usefully refer to the relevant Rule 223(3)(b) of the Gujarat Police Manual, Volume III which reads as under :--

Rule 223 :-- Inquiries into accidental or suspicious deaths :

(1) to (3) xxx xxx xxxx xxx

(b) In all other cases of unnatural deaths, the investigating officer should go deep to find out the cause of death. An offence of murder should immediately be registered when there is slightest suspicion to that effect. All cases of suspicious death should as far as possible, be personally investigated by the Police Sub Inspectors. The case should be entrusted to Head Constables only if the Police Sub Inspectors are not available owing to other important engagements. Investigation made by Head Constables should be always verified by the Sub-Inspector.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is quite clear that this is one of the serious most cognazible offences warranting immediate arrest of the respondent. When that is the situation, to say the least, in view of Rule 223(3)(b) of the Police Manual, the investigating agency should not have taken upon itself a risk of not arresting the respondent more particularly when this type of dowry death cases are alarmingly increasing in the State. If the investigating agency is to adop such a casual and unconcerned approach, not only many such cases would go undetected, but it would also seriously shake the faith of the people in its overall integrity and the credibility. Over and above arguing this particular matter, Mr. A.D. Shah in view of importance of the problem, made a serious grievance against this type of irresponsible investigation requesting this court to give some such directions to the State Government which may make the investigating agency accountable for its lapse. The request of Mr. A.D. Shah is indeed well founded. Such lapses cannot be lightly, treated. We know that the first step to the ultimate justice is the honest and efficient investigation and if the investigating agency falters on the very first step, then it is not possible to deliver justice. Under the circumstances, the State Government may consider the following measures (i) to direct an appropriate inquiry into the matter and take the needed action, it so warranted with a view to see that such an unfortunate lethargy by the Investigating Officer in not arresting the accused does not take place in future; (ii) If the lapse of not arresting the respondent is found to be not bona fide, suitable departmental inquiry be held against the concerned official; (iii) To issue circulars to all police stations regarding the gravity and seriousness of the dowry death and need for immediate arrest of the accused persons; and (iv) The Legislature may as well consider incorporating some provisions in the
Dowry Prohibition Act
akin to
Section 4
of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 providing for the punishment for neglect of duties in order to make the concerned investigating Officer liable for the prosecution and punishment for the same.

8-2. Similarly, with utmost respect to the learned Judge, taking into consideration the seriousness of allegation of dowry death against the respondent and further since the investigation was in progress, he should not have released the respondent on an anticipatory bail. More particularly in view of the note of caution sounded by the Supreme Court in the case of Samudarsingh (1987 Cri LJ 705) (Supra), which reads as under :--

The widespread belief that dowry deaths are even now treated with some casualness at all levels seems to be well grounded. The High Court has granted anticipatory bail in such a matter. We are of the opinion that the High Court should not have exercised its jurisdiction to release the accused on anticipatory bail in disregard of the magnitude and seriousness of the matter. The matter regarding the unnatural death of the daughter-in-law at the house of her father-in-law was still under investigation and the appropriate course to adopt was to allow the concerned Magistrate to deal with the same on the basis of the material before the court at the point of time of their arrest in case they were arrested. It was neither prudent nor proper for the High Court to have granted anticipatory bail which order was very likely to occasion prejudice by its very nature and timing. We therefore consider it essential to sound a serious note of caution for future. The High Court is under no compulsion to exercise its jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail in a matter of this nature.

Now, of course, in reply to this decision of the Supreme Court, Mr. J.G. Shah submitted that the Supreme Court can not be said to have laid down any absolute proposition of law or a strait-jacket formula the in no case of bride burning and dowry deaths, the anticipatory bail cannot be granted. On principle, there indeed can not be any dispute about this submission on Mr. J. G. Shah. In fact, on this point, both Mr. A. D. Shah, the learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. P.S. Chapaneri, the learned A.P.P. have joined the issue with Mr. J.G. Shah. As a matter of fact, Mr. A.D. Shah has rightly pointed out that only few weeks ago, in one of such matters, where he appeared for the accused-husband, charged with (dowry) murder of his wife, in Misc. Criminal Application No. 1710/91, this court (Coram : K.J. Vaidya J.) had granted anticipatory bail on 11-7-1991. Few relevant distinguishing facts and circumstances of that case were like this -- "The accused Gautam E. Ruparel, an Electrical Engineer with Gujarat Electricity Board and on deputation as Assistant Engineer, Narmada Project, was in love with one Hina, working at Research Centre, M.S. University, Baroda, and got married somewhere in November, 1990. On 11-2-1991, Hina received severe burns at her residence and was removed to the hospital. Immediately her parents were informed about the same. No grievance of any ill-treatment, cruelty, demand for dowry etc. were made by the parents of the deceased Hina. Ultimately, in the early hours of 12-2-1991, Hina succumbed to her burns injuries and passed away. Thereafter, Hariprasad father of the deceased Hina suddenly desiring to have all belongings of her as well as her service benefits accrued to her, asked the accused-husband to part with the same, and for that purpose, he prepared a draft writing to be executed by the accused Gautam Ruparel. Nirav -- the brother of Hina purchased the stamp paper in February, 1991 in his name and the father-Hariprasad accordingly handed over the drafted writing along with the blank stamp paper to Gautam Ruparel. As Gautam Ruparel did not yield to the said demand of Hariprasad, Hariprasad filed a complaint against Gautam Ruparel Under
Section 302
,
,
498-A
and
of IPC." Thus, it can be seen that the accused Gautam Ruparel was granted anticipatory bail because the accusation levelled against him by Hariprasad the father of the deceased Hina did not stem from motives of furthering the ends of justice, but rather it stemmed from the ulterior motive of taking back some belongings and money of the deceased Hina from the accused-husband. Now coming to the facts and circumstances of the present case, at this stage it cannot be said that the complaint filed by the mother of the decaused Resila stemmed from any such ulterior motive of maliciously harassing or tarnishing the image of the respondent. As a matter of fact, the complaint against the respondent here appears to be genuine one and filed with the only motive of furthering the ends of justice. Further in this case, since the investigation was in progress facts of the case squarely fell within the purview of the Supreme Court decision reported in the case of Samundarsing (1987 Cri LJ 705) (Supra). In this view of the matter, the learned Judge committed an obvious error in granting anticipatory bail to the accused in this bride burning case of dowry death.

9. Now at this stage when this court was about to further discuss the merits of the actual incident and give detailed reasons for quashing and setting aside the impugned order, Mr. J.G. Shah, the learned advocate for the respondent, who at the initial stage very vehemently opposed this application, requested this court not to assign any reason in case if this court was ultimately inclined to allow this application with a view that the same may not inadvertently even prejudice the interest of the respondent. Now this apprehension of Mr. J.G. Shah that giving of the reasons in this matter may inadvertently prejudice the interest of the respondent, is wholly unfounded as the matters and applications are ultimately decided on their own merits. Anyway, since both Mr. A.D. Shah and Mr. Chapaneri, the learned A.P.P. have fairly expressed their no objection if the said request of Mr. J.G. Shah is granted, it has been decided to refrain from giving further reasons on merits while allowing this application. Mr. J.G. Shah further submitted that in the event of cancellation of bail, some reasonable time may be granted to the respondent so as to enable him to surrender to the police custody.

10. In the result, this application is allowed. The impugned judgment and order passed by the trial court granting anticipatory bail is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondent is directed to surrender to the investigating officer immediately. Mr. J. G. Shah, the learned advocate for the respondent stated that the respondent will surrender to Adipur Police Station on or before 27-8-1991. Rule made absolute.

11. While parting, taking into consideration the curse of atrocities on women and resultant dowry deaths in the State vis-a-vis the stark apathy shown firstly by the police in not apprehending the accused; secondly by the court in releasing the accused on anticipatory bail despite the investigation being in progress; and thirdly by the State for not moving at all for the cancellation of the bail, this court fees that it would be simply failing in its duties if some useful observations and suggestions are not made in the overall public interest, which may usefully enlighten the police, court and the State Government while dealing with such matters in future.

11-1. The duties of the police and the court to exercise extreme vigilance and circumspection in the matter of arrest and release of accused on bail :-- It is a matter of serious concern for anybody when one finds the investigating agency and sometimes the court of law also being criticised in remaining relaxed and not appreciating the seriousness and magnitude of the problems of atrocities on women when the accused are not immediately apprehended or lightly released on anticipatory bail. In cases of bride burning and dowry deaths, etc. the investigating agency as well as the courts deciding the bail applications, cannot afford to be insensitive and indollent to alarmingly increase stunning rate of bride burning, dowry deaths etc. which has virtually made the social consciousness restless dumb founded. Any day you just open the newspaper and hardly one comes across a single day when no such news regarding the atrocities on women, dowry death etc. etc. are not reported. In this regard, Mr. A.D. Shah and Mr. Chapaneri, the learned A.P.P. have placed before this court an issue of "illustrated Weekly of India" dated 3rd August, 1991, wherein the learned author Shri Gautam Mehta has vividly picturised the burning problem of the atrocities on women by setting forth the statistics for the year 1989, 1990 and up to 31st July 1991 in his informative article under the title 'Trial by Fire'. Both the learned advocates with the permission of the court have drawn the attention to the relevant paragraphs of the said article, which, with the due courtesy of the esteemed magazine, for the benefit of all, are reproduced as under. In pungently prefaced introductory note of the said article, it is observed :--

Gujarat, the State which gave to the world the apostle of ahimsa, is today notorious for the highest number of dowry -- related deaths in the country of women either being killed or committing suicide to avoid harassment. With a woman dying of burns every hour, Gujarat is ahead of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh in the dowry death stakes. This abhorrent social evil is not only allowed to continue, but allegedly even encouraged with the connivance of corrupt officials and doctors and this, despite the State's recent efforts to control it. (A report from Gujarat).

It is further observed that --

A look at the records of Gujarat reveals some startling facts. At least 24 women die of burns in the State daily -- giving it the dubious distinction of being the lad where the greatest number of women are either burnt to death by someone or commit suicide by setting themselves alight. From January 1989 to June 30, 1991, nearly 18,000 members of the second sex have lost their lives by fire. Even police records reveal that more than 3000 women have attempted to commit suicide by self-immolation in different parts of the State, during the past two and a half years. According to the records of the State CID (crime branch) as many as 2,596 women committed suicide by self-immolation between January 1989 and April 1991, and that 5,540 women succumbed to accidental bums. Besides this, 831 women were either stabbed to death or hanged.

The records of the hospitals in Ahmedabad and the postmortem centres in other parts of the State confirm these mind-boggling statistics. At least three female corpses with severe burns are received daily at the Civil Hospital, while the V.S. Hospital receives at least one. The records for 1986-87 reveal that at the B. J. Medical College, of the nearly 3,800 bodies received, 1.520 were females who had died of burns. At the N.H.L. Municipal Medical College, among the 1,600 bodies received, 490 were female victims of burns. If one compares these figures with recent data, one realises the intensity of the rising tide of bride-burning in Gujarat over the past five years.

All the post-mortem centres in the State's 19 districts receive daily, on an average, at least one female corpse with burns except for Nadia, where twice that number is received. However, how many of these deaths actually make their way into the Government records is a moot point. Some of the doctors at the post-mortem centres from Nadiad, Baroda, Jamnagar and Surat confirm that not all such deaths are reported to the Government and, sure enough, Government records confirm only 10,000 deaths between January 1989 and April 30, 1991 though they do confirm that at least 4,500 women die of burns every year in the State. The most shocking fact revealed by the statistics, however, is that of the 10,000 deaths on record with the Government, only 95 have been recorded as dowry deaths. The rest have been registered either as cases of simple suicide or accidental death. Rampant corruption among the police, judiciary, executive magistrates and doctors, apathy on the part of the police investigating the cases and the lack of forensic science expertise in the police department ensure that the anguished cries of thousands of bereaved parents go unheeded. Realising the seriousness of the situation, the Gujarat Government has formed a State-level Manila Suraksha Samiti (Cell for the protection of women) headed by Chief Minister Chiman Patel to look into atrocities against women. The administration has also taken the major decision of appointing women magistrates in each of the 19 districts of the State specifically to deal with cases of death of women by burning and also to record the dying declaration, which is considered the most important evidence in a case. The legal department has already initiated action in this direction and all efforts are being made to find qualified women who could be appointed to the post. The State Government has also set up a committee to review the laws pertaining to atrocities on women, and the committee has been asked to submit its report and recommend steps and changes to make existing laws more effective.

The whole idea of presenting the above scenerio from the article 'Trial by Fire' is to make the investigating agency as well as the courts of law little extra conscious and vigilant in the matter of the investigation as well as deciding the bail application in the cases of atrocities on women and dowry death with a view to see that guilty of such offences does not go scot free lightly. As a matter of fact, moment the serious offences like the present one are registered at the police station, and the accused moves for bail, both the investigating agency as well as the courts of law should have before their mental eyes the disquieting picture of dowry death depicted in the above referred article 'Trial by Fire' and the Supreme Court decision in the case of Samudarsingh (1987 Cri LJ 705) (supra) in order to see that real justice does not fail.

11-2. The need for framing the rules :--
Now in Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
, the Central Government and the State Government respectively have been vested with the necessary discretionary power to make rules for carrying out the purposes of the Act Under
Sections 9
and
. It appears that except the Central Government and the State of West Bengal, no other State has so far evinced any interest in framing the rules for effectively carrying out the object of the Act to meet with the menacing problem of dowry death. Taking into consideration the statistics and picture depicted in the foregoing paragraph of increasing number of cases of dowry deaths, it is high time that the State Government may seriously consider whether by framing any such rules, it can help solving and salvaging the grim problem cursing our society. It appears to this court that to ensure the effective implementation of the
Dowry Act
, the State Government may also take some measures by framing rules on the line of Section 21(1)(i)(iv)(v) and (vi) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
. The relevant measures as enumerated in the said section are reproduced hereunder :--

Section 21. Duty of Government to ensure effective implementation of the Act :--

(1) xx xx xx xx xx xx xx

(i) the provision for adequate facilities, including legal aid, to the persons subjected to atrocities to enable them to avail themselves of justice.

(iv) the appointment of officers for initiating or exercising supervision over prosecutions for the contravention of the provisions of this Act.

(v) the setting up of committees at such appropriate levels as the State Government may think fit to assist the Government in formulation or implementation of such measures.

(vi) provision for a periodic survey of the working of the provisions of this Act with a view to suggesting measures for the better implementation of the provisions of this Act.

11-3. The need for expeditiously moving the High Court for cancellation of the bail :--Despite announcements by the State Govt. that it is taking special care in cases of atrocities on women, dowry death etc. unfortunately in practice : what we are noticing is that simple step like moving the High Court for cancellation of the bail is either not taken at all, or if taken, then the same is not taken as expeditiously as one ordinarily expects it to be. This court is coming across several such cases wherein the State Government has not moved for cancellation of bail and as a result, the aggrieved individuals having been left with no alternatives are constrained to file the application for cancellation of bail. Sometimes in a given case, there may be some justification in not moving for cancellation of the bail, but when the facts of the case are as gross and serious as the one in the present case, the State is certainly not justified in not moving for cancellation of bail. The question that arises for consideration under such circumstances is what the poor complainant is to do to vindicate his/her grievances to get justice when somehow the State machinery as usual is unable to come out of its die-hard habit of red-tapism, lethargy, unconcerned and impersonal attitude in such matters. It is really unfortunate that where it was duty of the State to file the application for cancellation of bail of the respondent and for the said default, the petitioner had to rush from Anjar to Ahmedabad to redress her grievance. The State Government must necessarily bear in mind that the object underlying the cancellation of bail is to protect the fair trial and secure justice being done to the society by preventing the accused who is set at liberty by the bail order from tampering with the evidence and for this any delay in moving for the cancellation of the bail could only show the ignorance and indifference of the concerned authorities of the purpose of cancellation of the bail and cause of just. Incidentally, it will not be out of place to point out that apart from such cases of bride burning and dowry deaths, in other serious criminal cases of murder, rape, gang-rape, dacoity, smuggling etc. wherein even if the State Government moves the High Court for the cancellation of bail, the same barring exceptional few, most of them comes before the Court for admission after two to four months. Thereafter also even final hearing is so much delayed for non-service of notice etc. that the underlying object of the concellation of bail practically loses all its purpose and significance to the greatest prejudice and the interest of the prosecution. It is hardly required to be stated that once released on bail or anticipatory bail in serious criminal cases, where the punishment is quite stringent and deterrent, the accused person in order to get away from the cluthes of the same, indulge in various activities like tampering with the prosecution witnesses, threatening the family members of the deceased victim and also creating problems of law and order situation. Aforesaid activities are ordinarily conducted quite clandestinely by the accused and therefore it is not possible to detect and control. This only means that the State Government if at all seriously desires to move for the cancellation of bail then in that case, it must do so at the earliest. And for this, the authorities will have to give its serious considerations to find out the ways and means to eliminate the factors preventing or delaying the process of taking such matters before the High Court. It is hoped that the Government may devise some measures as a result of which such defaults, as far as possible, are not repeated and that the things are moved as expeditiously as possible. One such measure could be, the matter in the first instance be left to the investigating agency to do the needful in the matter of cancellation of bail, instead of making it pass through the bottle-necks of the office of the local Public Prosecutor, D.S.P., District Magistrate, Legal Department. Most of the time is unnecessarily consumed because of the intermediary bottle-necks which could be easily taken care of and time shortened. In fact, till the trial is over, since the investigating agency is statutorily in charge of the matter, the decision for cancellation of bail must ordinarily rest with the said agency. Of course, in a given case, if for whatever reason, if the said agency does not propose to file application for cancellation of the bail, the State Government or an aggrieved family member can certainly move the High Court in the said regard. Here also it is just not difficult to visualise and appreciate the difficulty lying in the way of the decision taking authority of the State Government for moving an application for cancellation of the bail because of some communication gap. But this difficulty can be easily sorted out and over come by the State Government by issuing appropriate directions to all the learned Public Prosecutors and the Investigating Officers of the State to immediately and directly forward a copy of the impugned judgment and order releasing the accused on bail to either the Home Department or the Legal Department so as to enable the decision taking authority to act upon it instantaneously. It is earnestly hoped that the observations made herein-above will be taken into consideration in the right earnest in the public interest.

12. The Registrar is directed to forward a copy of this judgment to (i) The Secretary, Legal Department (Legislation) Gandhinagar; (ii) The Secretary, Home Department, Gandhinagar; and (iii) The Director General of Police, Ahmedabad/Gandhinagar.