Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J.
Anil Kumar Talan – Petitioner
versus
State (Government NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
Bail Appl. No.1820 of 2022
Decided on 12.7.2022
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 438 – Anticipatory bail – FIR registered under Sections 182/192/195/203/389/420/469/470/471/500/120-B/34 of IPC – Incident of alleged suicide was fabricated – Same not only led to ignominy, adverse media coverage and misery to family of complainant but also resulted in undue incarceration of husband of complainant – Criminal proceedings were initiated as a gross abuse of process of law – Law appears to have been used as a weapon rather than a shield by fabricating incident of disappearance and suicide – Serious view needs to be taken of such incidents to ensure that social fabric is not ruined by such fabrication of facts – If false implication by fabricated omnibus allegations against entire family in course of matrimonial disputes and differences, is allowed, it may lead to further misuse of process of law and assume serious proportions – This is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner – Application dismissed. (Para 8)
Result: Anticipatory Bail Application dismissed.
ORDER
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J.—This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant/petitioner in FIR No.0597/2020 under Sections 182/192/195/203/389/420/469/470/471/500/120-B/34 IPC registered at PS: Pandav Nagar, Delhi.
2. In brief, as per the case of the prosecution, aforesaid FIR was registered on the complaint of Ms.Brijesh Devi wife of Dharmender Singh on 26.12.2020 wherein she alleged that Ms.Komal daughter of Shri Anil Talan (petitioner in the present petition) was married to her elder son Abhishek Kumar on 20.04.2018. Further, Komal Talan was not willing to live with Abhishek Kumar and in order to extort money from them, she hatched a conspiracy in association with her family members including the present petitioner and her friend Tushar Chaturvedi. In order to execute the plan to disappear from the matrimonial home, she gave false information regarding her suicide. In between, the family members of Komal Talan registered a case bearing FIR No.1479/2019 dated 06.07.2019 under Sections 498-A/364 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at PS: Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, UP against Abhishek Kumar and other family members. Abhishek Kumar was consequently arrested and is presently on bail in the aforesaid case.
On the basis of aforesaid complaint of Ms.Brijesh Devi, the present FIR No.0597/2020 was registered at PS: Pandav Nagar, Delhi.
3. It is further the case of the prosecution that Komal Talan firstly went to Jaipur, Rajasthan by bus and from there she booked a railway ticket. Further, she went to Mumbai by flight and from there, she went to Bangalore by train. She was subsequently recovered by the STF team of Ghaziabad, UP. Further, at the time of booking of train ticket, Komal Talan used her new mobile number 9971480551 and alternate number as 9990191335. In the CAF, subscriber of mobile number 9971480551 is Kamakshi D/o Anil Talan and alternate number 9990191335 is mentioned to be of co-accused Tushar Chaturvedi.
4. During investigation, CDRs were obtained and mobile number 9971480551 of Kamakshi (used by Komal Talan) was found to be in touch with mobile number 9990191335 of co-accused Tushar Chaturvedi. Also, the aforesaid mobile number of Tushar Chaturvedi was found to be in touch with mobile number 9818573035 used by Rajat Talan (brother of Komal Talan) and 9997066979 used by Anil Talan (i.e. present petitioner). It is also the case of the prosecution that during the course of investigation, it was revealed that mobile number 9971480551 used by Komal Talan was purchased by her from Ram Nagar near Ghaziabad on the basis of fake Aadhar Card in the name of Kamakshi, which does not exist as per UIDAI records.
5. Further, during the course of investigation, accused Tushar Chaturvedi was arrested on 17.12.2021, who made a disclosure statement. Also, statement of one Nizamuddin was recorded who stated that mobile number 9997066979 is in his name and the SIM had been handed over to Anil Talan (petitioner).
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that marriage of Komal Talan was solemnized with Abhishek Kumar (son of the complainant) on 20.04.2018 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and an Audi car along with cash and other articles were given in the marriage. However, the daughter of the petitioner was subjected to cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry and under distress and depression, Komal Talan left the matrimonial home, without knowing the consequences, on 05.07.2019 leaving the car near Hindon river. It is further submitted that since the petitioner’s daughter (Komal Talan) did not inform her mother or the petitioner as to leaving the matrimonial home, the complaint was lodged with the police for legal action and accordingly FIR No.1479/2019 was registered on 06.07.2019 under Sections 498-A/323/364 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at PS: Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, UP. Further, when the petitioner’s daughter came back and made a statement that she left on h
If false implication by fabricated omnibus allegations against entire family in course of matrimonial disputes and differences, is allowed, it may lead to misuse of process of law and assume serious ....
The misuse of legal provisions in matrimonial disputes, resulting in false allegations, can adversely affect legal processes and social fabric, justifying the denial of anticipatory bail.
Grave nature of allegations and fact that criminal proceedings under Section 364 IPC were falsely initiated, in connivance, I do not find case to be fit for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner.
Grave nature of allegations and fact that criminal proceedings under Section 364 IPC were falsely initiated, in connivance, I do not find case to be fit for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when there is lack of evidence supporting the allegations and the petitioner has cooperated in the investigation.
Anticipatory bail can be granted in cases where the allegations are found to be false and there is no need for custodial interrogation. The court should consider the facts of the case and the partici....
Anticipatory bail is not warranted in serious cases of sextortion where custodial interrogation is essential for a fair investigation.
Anticipatory bail may be granted when the accused cooperates with the investigation and where similar co-accused have been released on bail, despite serious allegations of domestic violence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
