The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of the viscera report in cases involving alleged poisoning, the presumption of dowry death under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act, and the need for a thorough examination of evidence before framing charges.

1. In compliance of this Court’s order dated 26.04.2013 Investigating Officer Navneet Singh Bhullar is present, in person, in the Court.

2. This is an application seeking regular bail in Case Crime no. 82 of 2012 (Sessions Trial No. 90 of 2012) under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC read with Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun.

3. In the present case, before the trial court Dr. Ram Chandra Singh Rawat PW7 has been examined. As per statement of PW7 Dr. Ram Chandra Singh Rawat, no injury was noticed on the person of deceased Pooja and cause of death could not be ascertained. Therefore, viscera were preserved for chemical examination.

4. Today, Ms. Anjali Noliyal, Advocate appearing for the applicant, handed over a photo copy of the postmortem report of deceased Pooja, which is taken on record.

5. As per postmortem report and as per statement of Dr. Ram Chandra Singh Rawat PW7, no injury was noticed on the body of deceased, cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera were preserved for the chemical examination. No viscera report is received as yet to say cause of death of Ms. Pooja was due to poisoning.

6. Applicant is in judicial custody for last one year. He was arrested because report was lodged against him for the offence punishable under Section 304-B, 498-A IPC and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Despite the fact that no injury was found on the dead body of Ms. Pooja and cause of death of Pooja could not be ascertained, applicant is facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC.

7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the present case, I direct let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties, of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.

8. Before parting with the judgment, in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court while exercising the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with inherent jurisdiction as provided under Section 482 Cr.P.C. of the would like to discuss and observe as under:

9. Now, very important questions of law have emerged for the consideration by this Court:

(i). As to whether police is well within its jurisdiction to arrest the husband and relative of husband and to file charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC, if no ante mortem injuries are found during the postmortem and chemical examination of viscera does not suggest death by poisoning?

(ii). What Magistrate and Sessions Judge are supposed to do if police has filed charge-sheet under Section 304-B IPC in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.

10. Mr. A.S. Gill, Sr. Government Advocate, contends that if there are allegations in the FIR to the effect that deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment, in connection with demand of dowry before her death and death was within seven years of marriage, statutory presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act would be against the husband or relatives of the husband, as the case may be, therefore, police is duty bound to arrest the accused considering the gravity of the offence. He further contends that if accused is arrested, then in normal course after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has to be filed within statutory period, as provided under 167 (2) Cr.P.C.; therefore, even if cause of death could not be ascertained during the postmortem and chemical - pathological examination report of viscera is not received, even then police has to file charge-sheet in anticipation of receiving positive chemical examination report about poisoning within statutory period of filing of charge-sheet otherwise, accused would be enlarged on default bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. and thereafter, can manipulate or temper with the evidence.

11. Mr. A.S. Gill, Sr. Government Advocate, further contends that if charge-sheet is filed containing t