SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Indrajit Kumar Singh vs The State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) & … on 3 October, 2018

% Judgment Reserved on: 26th September, 2018
Judgment Delivered on: 3rd October, 2018
+ W.P.(CRL.) 3486/2016
Represented by: Mr.A.K.Srivastava and Mr.Arvind
Tiwari, Advocates


ORS. ….. Respondents

Represented by: Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel
for the State with Mr.Jamal Akhtar
and Mr.Chaitanya, Advocates and
ASI Virendera Singh, PS Crime



1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks directions to respondents to
conduct a fair and thorough inquiry into the case and the circumstances of
the death of petitioner’s wife Late Smt.Aahana Rajput who died on 16th
August, 2014 allegedly by committing suicide while living with her parents,
brother and sister at Police Colony, Narela, Delhi as also registration of FIR
based on the complaints and information provided by the petitioner to the

2. Case of the petitioner is that he had married Ms.Aahana Rajput on
17th February, 2014 at District Vaishali Vihar and after the marriage the
couple lived at the native village for about 20-25 days, whereafter on the
insistence of the petitioner’s wife they came to Delhi and resided with the
father of the petitioner at his Government accommodation at Sarojini Nagar

W.P.(Crl.) No.3486/2016 Page 1 of 6
for about 10-12 days whereafter his wife went to her parents’ house. On 16th
August, 2014 the petitioner received a phone call at about 11:30 PM from
his father-in-law informing that his wife has died. Petitioner got to know
that she was taken to Raja Harish Chandra Hospital and when he reached
there around 2:00 – 2:30 AM on the night intervening 16th and 17th August,
2018 he came to know that his wife had been taken to Government Hospital
Jahangir Puri where she was found in the mortuary. Petitioner suspected
some foul play and expressed his suspicion which was brushed aside. The
dead body of the petitioner’s wife was not handed over to him though
petitioner and his family wished to take the dead body of his wife to their
native place for performing the last rites. On 17th August, 2014 her
cremation was performed at Narela Ground when petitioner, his family
members and the priest were present. After collecting the ashes on 17th
August, 2014 the petitioner went back to his native village for its immersion
and performing other rituals whereafter the petitioner along with his family
came back to Delhi on 2nd September, 2014. On coming to Delhi, they
came to know that FIR No.1057 dated 18th August, 2014 under Sections
498A/304-B/34 IPC was registered at PS Narela on the complaint of the
petitioner’s father-in-law falsely alleging dowry demand by the petitioner
and the family members. On 15th October, 2014, petitioner requested the
Principal Secretary (Health) to get the post-mortem report re-examined by a
Medical Board. It was later revealed that the viscera of the wife was not
preserved and thus the same was not sent for forensic analysis. Petitioner
contends that his wife was involved in an affair with the cousin of her friend
even before marriage and the present marriage was forced by her parents
against her wishes and that she had attempted to commit suicide earlier as

W.P.(Crl.) No.3486/2016 Page 2 of 6
well. For this reason immediately after marriage the wife of the petitioner
did not reconcile and started living at her parents’ house. She also got
terminated her pregnancy. Petitioner apprehends that since his father-in-law
is working in Delhi Police, he got a false FIR registered which is full of
discrepancies and foisted a false case on the petitioner and his family
members. In this regard, the petitioner had filed a W.P.(Crl.) No.2340/2014
before this Court inter-alia seeking directions to respondents to conduct a
fair and thorough inquiry into the case and circumstances of the death of the
petitioner’s wife and to bring real culprits to book. The petitioner also filed
a complaint with the Cyber Crime Cell EOW requesting to investigate his
wife’s facebook profile activity to safeguard the essential digital evidence
and prevent further damage and to register FIR thereon. Despite repeated
requests, nothing was done rather charge sheet under Section 173 Cr.P.C.
was filed keeping petitioner and his father in column No.11 and the mother
of the petitioner in column No.12.

3. On a notice being issued, a status report has been filed by the State
followed by three further status reports. As per the first status report, a PCR
call was received on 16th August, 2016 which was recorded vide DD
No.52A at PS Narela regarding admission of Aahana d/o Shambhu, aged 21
years by her mother at SRHC Hospital, Narela where she was declared
brought dead. SI Amit reached the hospital and collected the MLC. Crime
team was called at the spot and one chunni was found wrapped at the ceiling
fan which was taken into police possession. Since Aahana was married on
17th February, 2014, the SDM was called and statement of father of Aahana
was recorded who stated that he got married his daughter with the petitioner
on 17th February, 2014. After sometime his daughter came back to his house

W.P.(Crl.) No.3486/2016 Page 3 of 6
and did not return to her in-laws house. His son-in-law i.e. the petitioner
used to visit their house on regular basis and sometimes he stayed at their
house also for 7 to 8 days. His daughter used to complain that after
marriage, petitioner threw watch and ring on her face and slapped her. Her
mother-in-law was always angry with her for not fulfilling her dowry
demand. She demanded a car also. The petitioner used to beat his daughter
number of times. He pacified his daughter and gave a cheque of ₹5 lakhs to
father of the petitioner but he did not take the cheque and demanded cash.
Thus he gave him ₹5 lakhs in cash. When the complainant wanted to send
back his daughter, father of the petitioner insisted that before sending the
daughter, there should be a meeting between the parties. On 16 th August,
2014 a notice from Delhi Commission for Women was received by him.
When he asked Vimal Singh (father of the petitioner) to fix the time for
meeting, however, he did not revert back. He kept the notice on the table
which was read by his daughter however he took back from her. The
complainant consoled his daughter telling her not to worry and things will
be alright, such things keep happening in the families to which she told that
they would kill her and she would not go to her matrimonial home. He went
to his duty at 8:00 PM whereafter his daughter committed suicide due to the
notice/summon from Delhi Commission for Women.

4. During investigation, site plan was prepared and as per the post-
mortem report, cause of death was congestion and asphyxia due to hanging.
Petitioner and his father were granted anticipatory bail. Further opinion was
also sought from the autopsy surgeon who opined that the ligature mark
found on the neck was possible from the ligature material i.e. the chunni.
On the allegations of the petitioner inquiry was conducted. Statements of

W.P.(Crl.) No.3486/2016 Page 4 of 6
family members and neighbours of Aahana were recorded which did not
reveal that Aahana had any affair with someone nor the so called friend of
Aahana could be traced. Abortion had to be done due to the death of the

5. Detailed inquiry was conducted qua the five numbers given by the
petitioner out of which one was of the mother of Aahana and the other of
Aahana and rest three numbers belonged to three other persons who did not
know Aahana and had no contact with her. As regards the facebook account
on investigation it was found that the said account was accessed twice after
16th August, 2014 in the month of August, 2014 from IP on
29th August, 2014 at 08:06:25 IST and from IP on 26 th
August, 2014 at 13:27:28 IST. Both the IPs belong to Airtel and notice was
sent by an e-mail to the service provider to know the details of the of the
user of the above said IPs to which a reply was received that they had no
record of that time and thus user identity that had accessed the facebook
account of Aahana could not be revealed. Request was also made to the
Facebook’s Law Enforcement but no information was received from the

6. As noted above, except that after the death of Aahana her facebook
account was accessed by two persons who could not be traced, there is no
other material to come to the conclusion that there is lacuna in the
investigation carried out. The plea of the petitioner that Aahana committed
suicide because of her pre-marital affair would be a defence available to the
petitioner during the course of trial.

W.P.(Crl.) No.3486/2016 Page 5 of 6

7. As noted above, a similar petition was also filed by the petitioner
being W.P.(Crl.) No.2340/2014 which was withdrawn by the petitioner with
the following observations on 3rd February, 2014:-

“Status report has been filed. Learned Standing Counsel
for the State submits that information provided by the
petitioner regarding mobile numbers as well as
transcripts will be examined during the investigation.
In view of this statement, learned counsel for the
petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the petition.
Writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn.”

8. The mobile phone numbers etc. have already been examined. Thus,
this Court finds no ground to pass any further directions in the writ petition.

9. Petition is dismissed.

OCTOBER 03, 2018

W.P.(Crl.) No.3486/2016 Page 6 of 6

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation