Full Text
Translation output
i •
$"-8&9 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 2229/2017
RAJKUMARI Petitioner
•Represented by: Mr. Abhijat, Mr. Shaashwat Jindal, Mr. Abhishek Agarwal, Advs.
$"-8&9 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 2229/2017
RAJKUMARI Petitioner
•Represented by: Mr. Abhijat, Mr. Shaashwat Jindal, Mr. Abhishek Agarwal, Advs.
VERSUS
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI Respondent Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with SI Jagdish PS Burari.
BAIL APPLN. 223 0/2017 OM PAL Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Abhijat, Mr. Shaashwat Jindal, Mr. Abhishek Agarwal, . Advs.
BAIL APPLN. 223 0/2017 OM PAL Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Abhijat, Mr. Shaashwat Jindal, Mr. Abhishek Agarwal, . Advs.
VERSUS
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI Respondent Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with SI Jagdish PS Burari.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
01.02.2018 By the present petitions, the petitioners seek anticipatory bail in case
FIRNo. 453/2017 underSections 498A/306/34 IPC registered at PS Burari.
Learned APP for the State on instructions submits that based on the statements of the sister and brother of the d.eceased charge-sheet for offence punishable under Section 498A/ 304B IPC has already been filed before the
Court concerned.
BAILAPPLNs. 2229/2017and 2230/2017 page 1 of3
2018:DHC:9004 The .above-noted FIR was registered on the complaint of Smt. Rajwanti recorded by the SDM Civil Lines. Smt. Rajwanti stated that her daughter,Sangeeta was married to Rickky, son of the petitioners herein on
23''^ February, 2015 and a girl child was bom from the wedlock. She stated that after the marriage of her daughter everything was fme in the matrimonial home for three months, however thereafter the petitioners began to torture her daughter physically and mentally. It is ftirther alleged that the mother-in-law used to taunt on each and every work done and tried to find flaws therein. In the statements of brother and sister of the deceased recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. it is also noted that the petitioners demanded ^50,000/- for purchasing a car, however no date and time of the demand has been specified.
• There are no specific instances as to how the torture was committed.
Thus, from the material on record in cannot be inferred whether soon before the death demand and harassment in relation to dowry was committed.
' Secondly whether the allegation offinding flaws in the day-to-day routine would amount to harassment leading the deceased to commit suicide bringing the act within the ambit ofabetment ofsuicide would be an issue to be considered at the time of framing of charge.
On the allegations made in the statement's recorded, the present is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the two petitioners who are both
Government employees. It is therefore directed that in the event ofarrest the petitioners be released on bail on their fiimishing apersonal bond in the sum of^25,000/- each with one surety each ofthe like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/ SHO concerned/ Court concerned, BAIL APPLNs. 2229/2017 and 2230/2017 farther subject to the conditionthat the petitioners will join the investigation as 'and when directed and will not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court concerned and in case of change of addressthe same will be duly intimated to-the Court concerned by way of affidavit.
Petitions are disposed of. Order dasti.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
FEBRUARY 01,2018 'ga' BAIL APPLNs. 2229/2017 and 2230/2017 page 3 of3
01.02.2018 By the present petitions, the petitioners seek anticipatory bail in case
FIRNo. 453/2017 underSections 498A/306/34 IPC registered at PS Burari.
Learned APP for the State on instructions submits that based on the statements of the sister and brother of the d.eceased charge-sheet for offence punishable under Section 498A/ 304B IPC has already been filed before the
Court concerned.
BAILAPPLNs. 2229/2017and 2230/2017 page 1 of3
2018:DHC:9004 The .above-noted FIR was registered on the complaint of Smt. Rajwanti recorded by the SDM Civil Lines. Smt. Rajwanti stated that her daughter,Sangeeta was married to Rickky, son of the petitioners herein on
23''^ February, 2015 and a girl child was bom from the wedlock. She stated that after the marriage of her daughter everything was fme in the matrimonial home for three months, however thereafter the petitioners began to torture her daughter physically and mentally. It is ftirther alleged that the mother-in-law used to taunt on each and every work done and tried to find flaws therein. In the statements of brother and sister of the deceased recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. it is also noted that the petitioners demanded ^50,000/- for purchasing a car, however no date and time of the demand has been specified.
• There are no specific instances as to how the torture was committed.
Thus, from the material on record in cannot be inferred whether soon before the death demand and harassment in relation to dowry was committed.
' Secondly whether the allegation offinding flaws in the day-to-day routine would amount to harassment leading the deceased to commit suicide bringing the act within the ambit ofabetment ofsuicide would be an issue to be considered at the time of framing of charge.
On the allegations made in the statement's recorded, the present is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the two petitioners who are both
Government employees. It is therefore directed that in the event ofarrest the petitioners be released on bail on their fiimishing apersonal bond in the sum of^25,000/- each with one surety each ofthe like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/ SHO concerned/ Court concerned, BAIL APPLNs. 2229/2017 and 2230/2017 farther subject to the conditionthat the petitioners will join the investigation as 'and when directed and will not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court concerned and in case of change of addressthe same will be duly intimated to-the Court concerned by way of affidavit.
Petitions are disposed of. Order dasti.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
FEBRUARY 01,2018 'ga' BAIL APPLNs. 2229/2017 and 2230/2017 page 3 of3
JUDGMENT