$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 3166/2023
ABHIMANYU ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Arundhati Katju, Mr. Yudhister
Sharma, Mr. Gursimran Singh Sodhi
& Ms. Ritika Moena, Advocates.
versus
STATE GNCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the
State with Insp. Pawan Kumar, P.S.
Alipur.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
O R D E R
% 31.01.2024
1. The present application under Section 439 read with Section 482 of
the Cr.P.C. seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 691/2022, under Sections
498A/406/304B/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Alipur.
2. The case of the prosecution as per status report dated 23.11.2023,
authored by Insp. Satender Pal Singh, SHO, P.S. Alipur is as under:
1. It is submitted that on 31.10.22, an information vide DD No. 94-A
from Nirmal Hospital, Bakhtawarpur, Delhi, was received at PS Alipur
that one woman Neha W/o Abhimanyu R/o H. No. 86, Hamidpur,
Delhi has been admitted on MLC No. 28/22 and she has been declared
brought dead. The same was entrusted to ASI Satyaveer, PS Alipur for
necessary action. ASI Satyaveer reached at the hospital and found that
the deceased, Neha was admitted with A/H/O hanging. Thereafter, the
dead body of deceased Neha was got inspected by Crime team and sent
for preservation in mortuary of BJRM Hospital, Jahangirpuri, Delhi for
postmortem. Thereafter, ASI Satyaveer reached at the residence of
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:40:52
deceased Neha i.e H.No.8, Vill Hamidpur, Delhi.
2. That the spot was got inspected and photographed by the Crime
Team. No suicide note was recovered from the spot. It was found that
the deceased got
married on 26.12.2021 and she died within seven years of her marriage.
On this ASI Satyaveer took action u/s 176 CrPC and informed the
SDM/Alipur who appointed Sh. Soma Shekhar Appa Rao Kotor
(Executive Magistrate) for further necessary action.
3. That on 01.11.22, Sh. Soma Shekhar Appa Rao Kotoru, Executive
Magistrate recorded the statement of Sh. Ravinder; father of the
deceased Neha who alleged that around 15 days before Lagan,
Joginder (father-in-law of deceased) had asked him to give a golden
ring for his father. He further stated that on 26.12.2021, he married his
daughter Neha with Abhimanyu S/o Sh. Joginder and he gave dowry as
per his status. After one month of the marriage, the in-laws of his
daughter started torturing her for fewer dowry article. The accused
Abhimanyu used to taunt her for fewer dowry articles and he was
demanding for a car. The complainant along with other relatives went
to the matrimonial home of his daughter and tried to resolve the issues.
On 28.04.2022, the deceased Neha had called him (her father) and told
him that Abhimanyu had physically assaulted him for dowry. The
complainant along with other family members visited the deceased and
also called police but Joginder (father-in-law) and Babita (mother-in-
law) assured them that they will not repeat the same. On which the
complainant didn't want any police action. After one hour, when they
reached at their home, they got a call from Joginder (father-in-law) who
told them that he is sending Neha to their house and they would take
her when they arranged for a car. Neha (the deceased) remained for
three months at her parental home. On 29.07.22, the complainant
arranged Rs. 1 Lacs and requested Joginder (father-in-law) to take
Neha with them, when Joginder (father-in-law) along with Babita
(mother-in-law), Abhishek (brother-in-law) and Abhimanyu (husband)
came to their house, he gave them Rs. 1 lacs on which they agreed to
take Neha with them. The complainant further stated that after this,
whenever they talked with Neha, she used to told them that she couldn't
bear the torture of her in-laws. On 31.10.22, Neha called the
complainant (her father) and told him that Abhimanyu had physically
assaulted her and he also threatened her for dire consequences. At
around 11:30 PM, he got a call from Joginder (father-in-law) who told
him that Neha has committed suicide by hanging herself at home. The
complainant alleged that his daughter, Neha was murdered by
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:40:52
Abhimanyu (husband) and Abhishek (brother-in-law) for dowry. On
the statement of Sh. Ravinder, the above mentioned case was registered
4. That during the course of investigation, the PM of the deceased Neha
was conducted vide PM No. 1165/22 at BJRM Hospital, Jahangirpuri,
Delhi and during PM of deceased, the autopsy surgeon preserved
viscera of the deceased and kept the cause of death pending till the
receipt of chemical analysis report of viscera and blood. The autopsy
surgeon also preserved the nail clippings of deceased Neha.
5. That during further course of investigation the statement of the
witnesses i.e. relatives of deceased, were recorded wherein they
corroborated the allegations/facts as stated by complainant Ravinder
Kumar (father of deceased). The mother of the deceased, Smt. Rekha
stated that the in-laws of deceased Neha, were torturing her for dowry
and used to taunt her that her father didn't give a car in the marriage as
dowry. The in-laws of deceased Neha were demanding gold items as
dowry and they were asking that this shouldn't be disclosed to the
mediator. On 28.04.22, Neha called her parents as Abhimanyu had
physically assaulted her for dowry. On this, parents of Neha and her
sister's had gone to her matrimonial home where they told her in-laws
that they can't fulfil their demand of car. But on the same day, the in-
laws of Neha, left her at her parental home and told them that they will
took Neha once they arrange a car for them. On 29.07.22, the
complainant, Sh. Ravinder managed to arrange Rs. 1 lac and he
requested the father-in-law of Neha to take her to her matrimonial
home. On this, Joginder, Babita, Abhishek and Abhimanyu came to
their house and the complainant gave them Rs. 1 lac on which they take
Neha with them. On 28.10.22, Neha called her parents and told them
that her father-in-law and mother-in-law are going to Jodhpur.
Rajasthan suddenly. On 31.10.22, Neha called them twice and she told
them. Abhimanyu had beaten her as he was asking for the car. She also
told them that Abhimayu had threatened her that if his demand doesn't
meet then he will again beat her. Sit. Rekha also stated that at that time
Abhishek was also present with Abhimanyu and he was also asking
Neha to bring car as soon as possible. These allegations are also
supported by other witnesses.
6. That during further course of investigation, on 01.11.2022, the
accused Abhimanyu S/o Sh Joginder R/o H.No.86, Vill Hamidpur,
Delhi (husband of deceased) was arrested. He disclosed that he used to
torture his wife for fewer dowry and they were demanding for a new
car from her parents. He further disclosed that due to this torment, his
wife committed suicide. The Viscera of the deceased and nail clippings
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:40:52
were sent to FSL for analysis. The report of Biology Division regarding
examination of nail clippings have been received and as per report
skin/tissue/foreign material couldn't be detected on exhibits. The
examination report of Viscera is still awaited.
7. That during the course of investigation, search of co-accused persons
namely Joginder Singh Mann, Babita Mann and Abhishek; was made
but they were absconding to evade their arrest. Hence, NBW's against
them were obtained. But the accused persons applied for anti-cipatory
bail and the Hon'ble court of Sh. Satish Kumar, Ld. ASJ, Rohini Court,
Delhi vide order dated 27.12.22, granted them interim protection and
asked them to join investigation. On 06.01.23, the accused sent a
representation along with a Pen drive containing conversation and the
transcription of the conversation which was allegedly recorded by his
son Abhimanyu on 29.07.22 at the residence of the complainant. In the
said recording/transcription, the complainant, his family members and
the deceased were upset with Abhimanyu as he was used to drink
alcohol.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant draws the
attention of this Court to the transcript dated 29.07.2022 with respect to a
conversation that took place between the applicant, mother of the applicant,
father of the applicant, aunt of the applicant as well as the deceased Neha,
the complainant, i.e., father of the deceased and the mother of the deceased.
It is pointed out that in the entire conversation which is part of the
chargesheet and had taken place at the house of the complainant there is no
mention of dowry or any demand of dowry. It is submitted that the tone and
tenor of the conversation recorded reflects that the issue was with regard to
alcohol abuse of the present applicant. Similarly, attention of this Court is
drawn to a diary, which was seized from the spot and is part of the
chargesheet, wherein, the deceased had allegedly recorded her emotions,
again reflecting
the problem with regard to applicant’s alcohol dependence.
It is pointed out that the aforesaid material is part of the chargesheet and
therefore, at this stage, it is contrary to the allegations made by the father of
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:40:52
the deceased as well as the other witnesses, whose statements are recorded
during the course of the investigation. It is further pointed out that applicant
was arrested on 01.11.2022. It is also stated that the other accused persons,
i.e. father and mother of the applicant, have already been released on
anticipatory bail with respect to whom similar allegations were made by the
complainant. It is further submitted that the trial is at the stage of
consideration on charge and the same has not been framed on account of the
fact that the FSL report is still awaited.
4. Per contra, learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the complainant submits that the handwriting in the
diary of the deceased, which has been placed on record alongwith the
chargesheet, could not be matched as there was no admitted handwriting
sample of the deceased available during the course of the investigation. It is
further submitted that the father of the deceased had made specific allegation
with respect to demand of dowry and that the aforesaid conversations are not
complete. It is further pointed out that the matter is at the stage of
consideration on charge and the material witnesses are yet to be examined.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. It is matter of record that the parents of the present applicant against
whom similar allegations have been made by the complainant have already
been released on anticipatory bail. The transcript of the conversation which
is on record of the learned Trial Court forming part of the chargesheet does
not say anything about dowry demand. The allegation made by the father of
the deceased with respect to demand of dowry is the matter of trial.
However, for the consideration of the present bail application, the transcript
cannot be ignored.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:40:52
7. Nominal roll dated 29.11.2023, received from the concerned Jail
Superintendent reflects that the applicant has been in judicial custody since
02.11.2022. The trial before the learned Trial Court is at the stage of
consideration on point of charge.
8. In totality of the facts and circumstance of the case, the present
application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail, on his
furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of like amount,
to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Link Court, further subject to
following conditions:
i. The applicant shall not leave NCT of Delhi without prior permission
of the learned Trial Court.
ii. The applicant shall intimate the learned Trial Court by way of an
affidavit and to the Investigating Officer regarding any change in
residential address.
iii. The applicant shall appear before the learned Trial Court as and when
the matter is taken up for hearing.
iv. The applicant is directed to give his mobile number to the
Investigating Officer and keep it operational at all times.
v. The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, tamper with evidence or
try to influence the witness in any manner.
9. The application is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
10. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of.
11. Needless to state that nothing stated hereinabove is an opinion on the
merits of the case and is only for the purpose of deciding the present bail
appplication.
12. Copy of the order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:40:52
necessary information and compliance.
13. Order be uploaded on the website of this court forthwith.
AMIT SHARMA, J
JANUARY 31, 2024/bsr
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:40:52