Full Text
Translation output
V- «l $-10 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN.2556/2016& CRL.M.(Bail)2205/2016
KHIMULI DEVI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Avadh kaushik,Advocate with Mr.Devashish Maharishi,Advocate
BAIL APPLN.2556/2016& CRL.M.(Bail)2205/2016
KHIMULI DEVI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Avadh kaushik,Advocate with Mr.Devashish Maharishi,Advocate
VERSUS
STATE(NCT OFDELHI) Respondent
Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla,APP for the State S.I. Sonu Ram,P.S. Aman Vihar
Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla,APP for the State S.I. Sonu Ram,P.S. Aman Vihar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
23.01.2017
23.01.2017
BAIL APPLN.2556/2016
This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.0830/2016, under Sections 304B/498A/34 IPG, registered atP.S. Aman Vihar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the mother in law ofthe deceased, who is innocent and is aged about60 years.
He further submitsthatshe is having a mentally retarded da.ughter ofaround
27 years and there is nobody who could look after her. He also submits that the matter has been investigated and the charge-sheet qua against the husband and son ofthe petitioner has already been filed. He further submits that there is no allegation qua against the present petitioner in the FIR and the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and prays that the petitioner
2017:DHC:8394 > be released on anticipatory bail.
Learned APP for the State on the other hand opposes the bail application on the ground that there are specific allegations against the present petitioner in the FIR and thatthe deceased died on 09.08.2016 at the matrimonial home where the mother in law was also residing in the same house on different floor. She further submits that the cause of death is the unnatural death, which occurred within two years ofthe marriage. She also submits that there are specific allegations qua against the mother in law of torturing and not even providing the basic needs to the deceased in the FIR and even a specific allegation that the deceased had bad eye on husband of the petitioner i.e. father in law. She further submits that the father in law of the deceased is already on bail butthe mother in law is absconding from the investigation since 10.08.2016 and accordingly prays that the bail application be dismissed.
I have perused the record.
It is an admitted fact existing in the instant case thatthe deceased died on 09.08.2016 within a period oftwo years ofmarriage in the house bearing
No.RZ-321,Pratap Vihar-II, Kirari, Suleman Nagar,Delhi. The allegations againstthe petitioner in the FIR are as follows
"At the time ofmarriage they stated that they do not want dowry but after marriage, they started harassing Seemafor petty things. At the time ofmarriage, we gave all requisite goods asfar as possible including bed, sofa and other daily use articles but when Seema reached at her in laws'house, her mother in law asked as to where are the tayals(clothes of children given in marriage) and when tayals were shown to her,she threw them and taunted. After marriage, Mahender's parents separated Mahender and Seemafrom them and sent them to reside on thefirst.floor ofthe house. Seema's mother in law did notallow her to take waterfrom thefridge andshe did not use to give her small kitchen things like belan and
LPG. All these things were sent by me from Haldwani.
Seema's mother in law used to say that whatyourfather had given and whether she had made a housefor you in Delhi/
Mahender never supported Seema. Seema's mother in law alleged against her that she had ill eye on herfather in law andshe was behaving very badly with Seema
So far as looking after the mentally retarded daughter of around 27 years is concerned,it is an admitted fact coming on record that the father in law is already on regular bail, who could look after his mentally retarded daughter. Moreover,there is an allegation against the petitioner that she has not participated in the investigation and she is absconding since 10.08.2016 and consequently charge-sheet qua against the other parties have not been filed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Consequently the present bail application is dismissed and the petitioner is directed tojoin the investigation forthwith.
Crl.M.(Bam 2205/2016 In view of the order passed in Bail Application No.2556/2016, the present application is dismissed as infhictuous.
JANUARY 23,2017/km I.S.MEHTA,J
This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.0830/2016, under Sections 304B/498A/34 IPG, registered atP.S. Aman Vihar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the mother in law ofthe deceased, who is innocent and is aged about60 years.
He further submitsthatshe is having a mentally retarded da.ughter ofaround
27 years and there is nobody who could look after her. He also submits that the matter has been investigated and the charge-sheet qua against the husband and son ofthe petitioner has already been filed. He further submits that there is no allegation qua against the present petitioner in the FIR and the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and prays that the petitioner
2017:DHC:8394 > be released on anticipatory bail.
Learned APP for the State on the other hand opposes the bail application on the ground that there are specific allegations against the present petitioner in the FIR and thatthe deceased died on 09.08.2016 at the matrimonial home where the mother in law was also residing in the same house on different floor. She further submits that the cause of death is the unnatural death, which occurred within two years ofthe marriage. She also submits that there are specific allegations qua against the mother in law of torturing and not even providing the basic needs to the deceased in the FIR and even a specific allegation that the deceased had bad eye on husband of the petitioner i.e. father in law. She further submits that the father in law of the deceased is already on bail butthe mother in law is absconding from the investigation since 10.08.2016 and accordingly prays that the bail application be dismissed.
I have perused the record.
It is an admitted fact existing in the instant case thatthe deceased died on 09.08.2016 within a period oftwo years ofmarriage in the house bearing
No.RZ-321,Pratap Vihar-II, Kirari, Suleman Nagar,Delhi. The allegations againstthe petitioner in the FIR are as follows
"At the time ofmarriage they stated that they do not want dowry but after marriage, they started harassing Seemafor petty things. At the time ofmarriage, we gave all requisite goods asfar as possible including bed, sofa and other daily use articles but when Seema reached at her in laws'house, her mother in law asked as to where are the tayals(clothes of children given in marriage) and when tayals were shown to her,she threw them and taunted. After marriage, Mahender's parents separated Mahender and Seemafrom them and sent them to reside on thefirst.floor ofthe house. Seema's mother in law did notallow her to take waterfrom thefridge andshe did not use to give her small kitchen things like belan and
LPG. All these things were sent by me from Haldwani.
Seema's mother in law used to say that whatyourfather had given and whether she had made a housefor you in Delhi/
Mahender never supported Seema. Seema's mother in law alleged against her that she had ill eye on herfather in law andshe was behaving very badly with Seema
So far as looking after the mentally retarded daughter of around 27 years is concerned,it is an admitted fact coming on record that the father in law is already on regular bail, who could look after his mentally retarded daughter. Moreover,there is an allegation against the petitioner that she has not participated in the investigation and she is absconding since 10.08.2016 and consequently charge-sheet qua against the other parties have not been filed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Consequently the present bail application is dismissed and the petitioner is directed tojoin the investigation forthwith.
Crl.M.(Bam 2205/2016 In view of the order passed in Bail Application No.2556/2016, the present application is dismissed as infhictuous.
JANUARY 23,2017/km I.S.MEHTA,J
JUDGMENT