IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMIT SHARMA, J.
Raj Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
The State, National Capital Territory Of Delhi - Respondent
Bail Appln. No.3895 Of 2022
Decided On : 14-03-2023
BAIL - Criminal Law - CrPC 439, IPC 307/498A/34 - The court granted bail to the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in a case registered under Sections 307/498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The court considered the contradictory statements of the complainant and an eye witness, lack of material to substantiate the prosecution's plea, and the filing of the chargesheet in reaching its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant alleged that she was pushed from the terrace by the applicant and other accused persons. However, an eye witness initially stated that the complainant jumped from the roof, and later retracted her statement. The chargesheet was filed, and the applicant had been in judicial custody since the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was a contradictory eye witness account, lack of material to substantiate the prosecution's plea regarding threat and evidence tampering, and the filing of the chargesheet. It concluded that keeping the applicant in judicial custody would serve no useful purpose.
Issues: Contradictory statements of the complainant and an eye witness, lack of material to substantiate the prosecution's plea, and the filing of the chargesheet.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the contradictory statements, lack of material evidence, and the filing of the chargesheet in granting bail to the applicant.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application and admitted the applicant to bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety, subject to specific terms and conditions.
JUDGMENT :
[Amit Sharma, J.]
1. The present application under Section 439 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) by the petitioner/applicant seeks grant of regular bail in FIR No. 512/2022 under Sections 307/498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), registered at PS Ranhola, New Delhi.
2. Briefly stated, the facts relevant for adjudication of the present application are as under:
ii. On reaching the hospital and subsequent enquiries, it was revealed that the nature of injuries were grievous and the injured had been married for less than seven years, hence SDM Punjabi Bagh was informed about the same. Upon receipt of the said information, the SDM Punjabi Bagh reached the hospital and recorded the statement of the victim.
iii. On 23.06.2022, the victim, in her statement alleged that she had married Mr. Ram Kumar 6-7 months prior to the date of the present incident and at the time of her matrimonial alliance, Rs. 2.5 lakhs were paid as dowry. It is further alleged in the statement that after her marriage, she was taunted, beaten and threatened for dowry as well as restrained from communicating and or meeting with her parents and husband. The victim has alleged that on 21.06.2022, by reason of her request to meet her mother, the present applicant, Mr. Raj Kumar Singh (brother-in law) along with other accused persons namely, Nempal Singh (father-in law), Mamta (mother-in law), & Monica (sister-in law) dragged her to the terrace and pushed her from there.
iv. Consequently, FIR 512/2022 under Sections 307/498A/34 of IPC was registered.
v. On 24.06.2022, the present applicant along with co-accused, Nempal Singh were arrested and sent to judicial custody.
vi. During the course of investigation, the statement of an eye witness i.e. the neighbor of the applicant/accused, Ms. Babita was recorded, who stated that the complainant herself jumped from the roof. However, during further course of investigation, the said eye witness retracted from her previous statement, by reason of which her statement was again recorded under Section 164 of CrPC, wherein she stated that the complainant was hanging from the roof and by reason of subsequent loosening of grip, she fell down.
vii. During the investigation, Call Detail Records were obtained & analyzed as well as a supplementary statement of the complainant was also recorded under Section 161 of CrPC. In her additional statement, the complainant admitted to having communicated with her mother, brother and husband through the phone of the present applicant and his wife. She stated that her relatives, Kamal @ Kamlesh and his wife, Hira Devi visited her matrimonial house wherein they witnessed her being abused & misbehaved with at the hands of the present applicant and his family. She further stated that subsequent to Kamal @ Kamlesh conveying to her in-laws that the complainant’s father shall come and take her from her matrimonial home, the present applicant along with the other co-accused persons dragged her to the terrace and threw her from there.
viii. It was also stated that the complainant had thrown three handwritten slips to a person named Kamal @ Kamlesh requesting him to save her from her in-laws on 21.06.2022. The aforesaid Kamal @ Kamlesh was also examined, who stated that the alleged three slips were handed over by him to the Investigating Officer.
ix. After the completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed before the Court of competent jurisdiction. Vide order dated 29.08.2022, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-05, Tis Hazari Courts dismissed the first bail application filed by the present applicant and co-accused, Nempal Singh. Vide order dated 30.11.2022, learned Additional Sessions Judge-09, Tis Hazari Courts dism
The court considered contradictory statements, lack of material evidence, and the filing of the chargesheet in granting bail to the applicant.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of contradictory statements of witnesses and the complainant, and the lack of material to substantiate the prosecution's plea of ....
The timing and specificity of allegations, completion of investigation, and framing of charges are crucial factors in considering bail applications in cases involving dowry demands and harassment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of allegations of dowry demand, mental cruelty, and the impact of supplementary statements on a bail application.
The significance of evidence and the burden of proof on the prosecution in cases involving serious charges like dowry harassment and abetment to suicide.
The absence of specific allegations of demand of dowry or harassment soon before the death, coupled with prolonged custody and parental responsibilities, can be grounds for granting bail in cases inv....
The presumption of a 'dowry death' under Section 304B IPC should be tested in trial and is meant to act as a deterrent to the demand of dowry.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the decision to grant anticipatory bail was influenced by the evidence presented, lack of requirement for further custodial interrogation, and....
Corroborated statements of family members can influence the court's decision in bail applications for offences under Sections 498A, 304-B of IPC.
Granting anticipatory bail based on inconsistencies in the statements of the victim and the complainant, the petitioner's cooperation in the investigation, and the lack of evidence of them trying to ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.