The court held that the power under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. must be exercised sparingly and requires strong evidence against the accused, not merely suspicion.

JUDGMENT :

(Sandeep Kumar, J.)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel appearing for the father of the deceased.

2. In this case, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 15.11.2022 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, VII, Saran at Chapra, in S. Tr. No.467 of 2016, by which the petitioners have been summoned under section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code to face the trial for the offences under Sections 323, 307, 498-A, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No.164 of 2015.

3. This Court vide order dated 22.07.2024 permitted learned counsel for the petitioners to withdraw this application on behalf of petitioner no.1. Hence, this order is restricted to petitioner nos. 2 to 4 only.

4. As per the prosecution case, the victim namely, Shilpi Devi, gave her statement before the Police in injured condition, alleging therein that she was married to Satya Prakash Tiwari in the year 2013 as per Hindu customs but just after one month of the marriage, Nagendra Tiwari her father-in-law; Satya Prakash Tiwari her husband; Prabhakar Tiwari and Diwakar Tiwari her brothers-in-law and Rakhi Devi her sister-in-law (Gotni) used to abuse and assault the victim for demand of dowry. The victim has informed this fact of assault and abuse to her parents. It has also been alleged that the accused persons tried to burn the victim by pouring kerosene oil upon her and after that in the month of January, 2015 i.e. on the eve of Makar Sakranti the accused persons again attempted to kill the informant by poisoning and on account of consuming poison, she was admitted at Sadar Hospital, Chapra. When this news was published in the daily newspaper, her parents came to know and they visited her in-laws house and took the victim to their house.

4.1. It has further been alleged that in the marriage of her brother-in-law (devar), the victim was taken to her sasural by her in-laws and after the marriage she was brought to her parents house by her husband as she was pregnant. On 06.08.2015 at about 2:00 P.M. her husband came to her house and entered into the room where the victim was sleeping with her bhabhi namely, Renu Devi. Thereafter, the husband of the victim started abusing her and after breaking the almirah he tried to take away the jewellery. When the informant objected, her husband fired at her, which hit at the right wrist and stomach of the informant. Since her bhabhi Renu Devi tried to snatch the pistol from her husband, he again fired upon Renu Devi, which hit at her left hand. In the meantime, the family members came into the room and during the process of snatching the pistol from the hand of the husband of the victim, the pistol got fired which hit the left hand of her husband.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid statement of victim, Manjhi P.S. Case No. 164 of 2015 was registered for the offences under sections 341, 323, 307, 326, 498-A and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, in course of treatment the victim died and therefore, an application was submitted by the Investigating Officer for adding section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in the F.I.R.

6. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted on 29.10.2015 finding the case to be true under sections 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 27 of the Arms Act against Satya Prakash Tiwary i.e. husband of the deceased whereas, investigation was kept pending against other persons. Thereafter, final form dated 12.06.2016 was submitted finding the case to be not true for the offences under section 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code against petitioner nos. 2 to 4 which was accepted by the learned Magistrate. The cognizance was taken against Satya Prakash Tiwary i.e. husband of the deceased for the offence under sections 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 27 of the Arms Act vide order dated 13.06.2016.

7. A protest petition was filed by Renu Devi, who is th