IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.
Sujeet Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Bail Appln. 1817 of 2021 & Crl. M.A. 8241 of 2021
Decided On : 26-08-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the death of jyoti kumari. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court's analysis and reasoning for denying bail. (Para 6) |
| 3. arguments regarding suicide, dowry demands, and mental state. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. court's final decision on bail application. (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER
(VIA VIDEO-CONFERENCING)
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. The present bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 10/2020 under Section 304B/498A/34 IPC registered at P.S. Shastri Park Metro.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 14.08.2020, an information vide DD No. 23A at 03.17 PM, regarding a woman who was not responding inside from Flat No. 316 3rd Floor, Transit Hostel DMRC, Near Shastri Park Metro Station, Delhi, was received in police station Shastri Park Metro, Delhi. The aforesaid DD entry was marked to IO/ASI Vinod Kumar, who had reached the spot along with W/Ct. Anjali. In the meantime, Ct. Sule Chand had also reached the spot, after receiving the aforesaid information. The main door of the flat was found closed from inside and no response was receiving from inside. On this, IO had pushed the door with the help of police staff, Sujeet Kumar (present petitioner), Harish Chander, DMRC Security Guard and Sonu Kumar, the resident of Transit Hostel and had entered in the aforesaid flat. It was found that the wife of petitioner namely Jyoti Kumari was hanging, with the help of blue plastic rope, knotted with ceiling fan and her legs were on two plastic chairs, in the bed room.
3. On making inquiry from petitioner, it came to notice that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with Jyoti Kumari, on 14.06.2019. Hence, the SDM/Seelampur was informed on mobile, about the incident. On this, SDM/Seelampur had deputed Sh. Dalbir Singh, Executive Magistrate (Seelampur). Delhi, to take up the proceedings U/S 176 Cr.P.C., who reached the spot and inspected the spot. The photographs of the spot were taken by the photographer of the Mobile Crime Team/NE Distt. Thereafter, the dead body of Jyoti Kumari was shifted GTB Hospital, Delhi, for further course of investigation. The MLC of the Jyoti Kumari was get prepared in the hospital and the dead body was preserved in the mortuary, GTB Hospital, Delhi.
4. The parents of the deceased were informed telephonically, regarding the incident and the SDM inquiry being conducted. During course of proceedings, the Executive Magistrate (Seelampur), Delhi had recorded the statements of Sh. Sanjay Kumar and Smt. Gauri Rani, the father/mother of the deceased on 16.08.2020. Thereafter, the postmortem of the dead body of Jyoti Kumari, was got conducted by Executive Magistrate (Seelampur), Delhi, on same day in the mortuary, GTB Hospital, Delhi and after postmortem, the dead body of Jyoti Kumari was handed over to the parents and other relatives, for funeral rites.
5. On 17.08.2020, Sh. Dalbir Singh, Executive Magistrate (Seelampur), Delhi had handed over his report vide No. F. NO./TEH/S.PUR/2020/461 dated 17/08/2020, along with the statements of Sh. Sanjay Kumar and Smt. Gauri Rani, the father/mother of deceased Jyoti Kumari, to IO/ASI Vinod Kumar for taking further legal action. On the basis of statement of Sh. Sanjay Kumar, father of deceased Jyoti Kumari, recorded by Executive Magistrate (Seelampur), Delhi, the present case vide FIR No 10/20 dated 17/08/2020 U/S 498A/304B/34 IPC was registered.
6. I have heard Ld. counsel for the petitioner, Ld. APP for the State and have also gone through the records of this case.
7. It is submitted by the Ld. counsel for the petitioner that as per the last message received by the brother of the deceased, she had committed suicide because she suspected her husband of having relations with different ladies and whenever, she confronted him in this regard she was badly beaten by him. It is further submitted by the Ld. counsel for the petitioner that in the entire suicide note there is not ev
Evidence of cruelty or dowry demands must substantiate claims under Section 304B IPC for bail considerations, particularly in cases involving unnatural death within seven years of marriage.
Dowry death - Bail dismissed - Soon before death - Death is an unnatural death and soon before the death deceased was subjected to cruelty, so it cannot be said that ingredients of Section 304 B IPC ....
The court granted bail to the accused in a dowry death case, citing insufficient evidence and the prolonged trial process as justifications.
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 and the lack of mention of dowry demands in the FIR led to the grant of bail to the petitioner, highlighting the importance of specific and detailed allegations in....
The lack of specific allegations against the petitioner in both the FIR and the suicide note warranted the granting of bail, emphasizing the principle that pre-trial detention must be justified by su....
Bail granted despite dowry allegations due to lack of prior criminal history and circumstances of the case.
The court may grant bail based on the statements of witnesses and the likelihood of the trial taking time for its conclusion, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court considered the lack of substantial evidence and the mitigating circumstances in granting regular bail to the petitioner in a case involving allegations of dowry death.
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.