Case Has Strong Trait Of Honour Killing - Rajasthan HC Refuses Bail To Two Prime Accused, Orders Further Investigation
The Rajasthan High Court denied and dismissed the bail applications of two accused in an honour killing case holding that the case has a strong trait of honour killing.
Justice Farjand Ali in this context held -
"The instant case has its own peculiar facts which are circumstantially diffusing smell of intent-full homicidal death on account of Honour and prestige i.e. having a strong trait of honour killing."
In this case, the deceased -Azad eloped and married the petitioner Bhim Saini's sister despite the family's disapproval. They were later found and apprehended by the police and the girl was made to accompany with the accused Bhim Saini. Following this the deceased filed a Habeas corpus petition before the court which later came to be withdrawn by the diseased on account of a compromise arriving between him and the accused persons. The body of the deceased was then found a few days after, tied with chains and drowned in water.
Following this the father of the deceased registered an FIR and an investigation was conducted by the police, wherein it was found that the accused were last people the deceased was known to be in contact with and that he had been receiving death threats from the accused about which he had also uploaded a chat on his Instagram stating that "bhai mujhe jaan se maarna chahta Hai bhim saini. Shaadi karli Hai uski ladki se". Furthermore the Medical officer in the matter of the deceased's medical report opined that the death was caused due to strangulation and that his injuries were ante mortem in nature.
Senior Counsel Shri Arvind Gupta who appeared on behalf of the accused contended that the case was squarely hinged on circumstantial evidence and so the petitioner should be given the benefit of bail while GA cum AAG Shri Ghanshyam Singh who appeared on behalf of the State strongly opposed the bail application.
The Court observed that every citizen of the country is abided and governed by rule of law and everyone has to follow it and thus held -
"Every citizen is principally embodied to access their fundamental right and legal right peacefully and if it is being hindered by anyone the rule of law and procedure established by law is therefore its recourse, but no citizen is allowed to take the courts of law in its own hands, strictly not."
The Court further observed -
" The case is actively pregnant with motive. As on the pitch of relevancy; motive remains a determining factor for washing away the clouds over the certain facts and pushes blurred discoloured events towards clarity by establishing a logical link/relation between certain acts so committed and thrust off or desired result."
The Court also opined that "the thrust for the justice should not be defeated merely on technical points rather it shall be ensured that the justice should be done above the technical barriers as the procedure is handmade of justice."
The Bench thus after going through the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record an otherwise, dismissed the bail applications filed by the accused stating that was not a fit case for extending bail to the accused at this stage.
The Court also directed the Superintendent of Police to appoint a competent officer not below the rank of Add. SP to conduct further investigation in the matter under section 173 of CrPC and to also file a supplementary charge sheet before the trial court taking all the left out evidences in the matter.