Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAILAPPLN. 1923/2013
SURBSH KUMAR GOYAL (THROUGH PAROKAR).... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Rambir Chauhan, Adv.
BAILAPPLN. 1923/2013
SURBSH KUMAR GOYAL (THROUGH PAROKAR).... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Rambir Chauhan, Adv.
VERSUS
STATE Respondent
Through: Mr.O.P. Saxena, APP.
Through: Mr.O.P. Saxena, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL
11.10.2013
11.10.2013
CRL.M.A.15541/2013 (exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
BAIL APPLN. 1923/2013
This is an application for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by accused Suresh Kumar Goyal who is the brother-in-law i.e. Nandoi of the deceased.
Ld. counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that marriage of deceased, namely, Santosh and Ashok Kumar was solemnised on
21.06.2006 andthe deceased died of unnatural death by hanging herselfwith a fan on 27.4.2013. It is stated that in the FIR there are names of six accused persons, namely, Ashok Kumar (husband), Sunita (sister-in-law), Hari Om Goyal andNarender Kumar Garg (brothers-in-law), Vinod Kumar
(brother-in-law i.e. Jeth) and the present petitioner Suresh Kumar Goyal
(brother-in-law i.e. Nandoi). It is stated that four accused persons i.e.
Sunita, Hari Om Goyal, Narender Kumar Garg and VinodKumarhave been granted bail by the sessions court. It is submitted that as per prosecution
2013:DHC:7662 case deceased has left behind a suicide note wherein there are no allegations against present petitioner. It is fiirther submitted that in the statement of mother ofthe deceased on the basis ofwhich FIR has been registered, there are allegations that one month before the death ofthe deceased, the husband of the deceased had raised a demand of ^2 lakhs upon the deceased and the petitioner was present there and the parents of the deceased had given
?20,000/- to the husband of deceased. It is further submitted that there are no allegations that present petitioner had also raised some demand. It is submitted that the deceased had lived for more than 6 years in the matrimonial home and there are no allegations that present petitioner had raised any demand ofdowry. Itis also submitted that petitioner was married
25years agoandwas living separately.
Ld. APP has opposed the bail application. Ld. APP has relied upon statement of parents of deceased. It is submitted that charge-sheet has already been filed.
The statement ofparents ofdeceased has been perused by this Court.
Considering the submissions made, the present petitioner who is the brother- in-law ofdeceased i.e. Nandoi is admitted to bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum ofRs.15,000/- with one surety inthe like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.
The application stands disposed of Dasti.
VEENABIRBAL, J OCTOBER 11,2013//srb 2013:DHC:7662
This is an application for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by accused Suresh Kumar Goyal who is the brother-in-law i.e. Nandoi of the deceased.
Ld. counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that marriage of deceased, namely, Santosh and Ashok Kumar was solemnised on
21.06.2006 andthe deceased died of unnatural death by hanging herselfwith a fan on 27.4.2013. It is stated that in the FIR there are names of six accused persons, namely, Ashok Kumar (husband), Sunita (sister-in-law), Hari Om Goyal andNarender Kumar Garg (brothers-in-law), Vinod Kumar
(brother-in-law i.e. Jeth) and the present petitioner Suresh Kumar Goyal
(brother-in-law i.e. Nandoi). It is stated that four accused persons i.e.
Sunita, Hari Om Goyal, Narender Kumar Garg and VinodKumarhave been granted bail by the sessions court. It is submitted that as per prosecution
2013:DHC:7662 case deceased has left behind a suicide note wherein there are no allegations against present petitioner. It is fiirther submitted that in the statement of mother ofthe deceased on the basis ofwhich FIR has been registered, there are allegations that one month before the death ofthe deceased, the husband of the deceased had raised a demand of ^2 lakhs upon the deceased and the petitioner was present there and the parents of the deceased had given
?20,000/- to the husband of deceased. It is further submitted that there are no allegations that present petitioner had also raised some demand. It is submitted that the deceased had lived for more than 6 years in the matrimonial home and there are no allegations that present petitioner had raised any demand ofdowry. Itis also submitted that petitioner was married
25years agoandwas living separately.
Ld. APP has opposed the bail application. Ld. APP has relied upon statement of parents of deceased. It is submitted that charge-sheet has already been filed.
The statement ofparents ofdeceased has been perused by this Court.
Considering the submissions made, the present petitioner who is the brother- in-law ofdeceased i.e. Nandoi is admitted to bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum ofRs.15,000/- with one surety inthe like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.
The application stands disposed of Dasti.
VEENABIRBAL, J OCTOBER 11,2013//srb 2013:DHC:7662
JUDGMENT