RAJ KISHORE GOEL Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND OTHERS
LAWS(UTN)-2012-2-37
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on February 23,2012

Raj Kishore Goel Appellant
VERSUS
Additional District Judge and others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.) BY means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the challenge is to the order dated 03.01.2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 277 of 1996 titled as State Vs. Raj Kishore Goel pertaining to Police Station Dalanwala, Dehradun.
(2.) THE background facts are that deceased Ramanna Goel espoused with Raj Kishore Goel (love marriage) on 15.05.1987. Both were residents of Dehradun city itself. Ramanna Goel was blessed with a son named Navtesh Goel. She was in her matrimonial home for almost short of a decade. Ramanna Goel died in her matrimonial house on 04.08.1996. An FIR was lodged by her father Niranjan Sharma on the same day within three hours of the incident. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted against Raj Kishore Goel for the offence under Section 306, 498 -A IPC but the learned Sessions Judge, on perusal of the case diary and evidence available on record, levelled the charge of Section 498 -A, 306 IPC and in alternative Section 302 IPC against the accused applicant. The order of Sessions Judge for levelling the charge was challenged by accused Raj Kishore Goel by filing Criminal Revision No. 362 of 2001 before this Court, which allowed the revision on 20.07.2005 and set aside the order passed by learned Sessions Judge with a direction to frame fresh charges against accused in accordance with law. While adjudicating the said revision, this Court was of the view that it is the duty of the prosecution to take a stand whether it is a case of murder or abetment of suicide. The prosecution cannot say at the same time that it is a case of murder and in case of suicide, the accused abetted the commission of suicide. So this Court directed the learned Sessions Judge to frame charges afresh either for the offence under Section 306 IPC or 302 IPC. The matter was remitted to the trial court, which having heard learned counsel for the accused as well as DGC, has categorically expressed his view that it was a fit case for levelling the charge of Section 302, 498 -A IPC.
(3.) FEELING aggrieved by this order, accused again has filed instant petition before this Court. Learned counsel for the applicant has read all the statements of witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and has vociferously contended that there is clear cut distinction between abetment of suicide and murder. Deceased was found hanged in a closed room bolted from inside and her dead body was brought out after breaking the main door of room.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.