Sandeep Sharma DECISION
Sandeep Sharma, J.
1. Bail petitioner namely, Kehar Sigh, who is behind the bars since 31.7.2019, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying therein for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 82/2019, dated 31.7.2019, under Section 306 of IPC, registered at police Station, Anni, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.
2. Sequel to order dated 10.12.2019, SI Dharam Singh has come present alongwith the record. Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General, has also placed on record fresh status report, prepared on the basis of the investigation carried out by the Investigating Agency. Record perused and returned.
3. Close scrutiny of the record/status report reveals that on 31.7.2019, complainant namely, Jai Chand lodged a report at police Station, Anni, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh that her daughter namely, Babli, whose marriage was solemnized 12 years back, has committed suicide on account of maltreatment and harassment meted to her by her husband i.e. present bail petitioner. Complainant alleged that immediately after the marriage, bail petitioner and other family members started torturing, harassing and maltreating her deceased daughter on account of dowry. He also alleged that bail petitioner oftenly used to compel her deceased daughter to bring money from her parents. He alleged that 8-10 days back her deceased daughter telephoned him that her husband (bail petitioner) is torturing her for no reason, but he consoled her daughter and assured that very soon he would visit her house. Complainant alleged that in the morning of 30th July, 2019 he received telephonic call from her deceased daughter that the bail petitioner is giving her beatings for no reasons and thereafter at 2:00 PM he received information that her daughter is serious. Complainant, as named hereinabove, alleged that her deceased daughter consumed poison on account of cruelty meted to her by bail petitioner as such, appropriate action in accordance with law may be taken against him. In the aforesaid background, a case under Section 306 of IPC, came to be lodged against the bail petitioner on 31.7.2019 and since then he is behind the bars.
4. Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General, while fairly admitting that challan stands filed in the competent Court of law and nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, contended that keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by the bail petitioner, he does not deserve any leniency. Learned Additional Advocate General while making this Court to peruse the statements having been made by the complainant as well as other persons made serious attempt to persuade this Court to agree with his contention that deceased was compelled to commit suicide on account of ill-treatment meted to her by her husband i.e., bail petitioner. Learned Additional Advocate General contended that since minor son of the deceased, who at present reside with the bail petitioner, is a material prosecution witness, it would not be in the interest of justice to enlarge the bail petitioner on bail at this stage because in the event of his being enlarged on bail, he may dissuade his minor son from deposing against him.
5. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record, this Court finds that on 31st July, 2019 deceased committed suicide by consuming poison, but investigation conducted so far reveals that none of the independent witness has stated something specific with regard to ill-treatment and mental harassment to the deceased by the bail petitioner or his other family members. It is o........