SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Krishna vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 24 September, 2018

$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment delivered on: 24.09.2018

+ BAIL APPLN. 1169/2018
KRISHNA ….. Petitioner
versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ….. Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr.Sanjiv Sahay, Adv.

For the Respondent: Ms.Neelam Sharma, APP for the State
with Insp.Sheelwant Singh, P.S.Mundka.

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT

24.09.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.72/2018 under
Section 498A/304B of the IPC, P.S. Munirka.

2. The allegation in the FIR against the petitioner, who is the
mother-in-law of the deceased, is that she used to harass the deceased.
The case of the prosecution is inter alia based on an alleged suicide
note allegedly recovered from the house of the deceased.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suicide note

BAIL APPLN. 1169/2018 Page 1 of 3
as well as the recovery of the suicide note is suspect, as the original
suicide note is not available and was not found by the crime team,
which had searched the house. The suicide note is alleged to have
been found by the sister of the deceased and handed over to the IO on
16.02.2018 i.e. two days after the incident. She is alleged to have
found the suicide note in the same one roomed house.

4. Forensic science laboratory has given an opinion based on the
photocopy of the suicide note, which was produced. IO who is present
in Court submits that the original suicide note is now not available on
record and seems to have been misplaced and appropriate enquiry has
been ordered by the concerned DCP.

5. Petitioner was granted interim protection by order dated
28.05.2018. Learned APP submits that petitioner did join
investigation. Investigation is complete and charge sheet has been
filed.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in
view the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that
petitioner has been able to make out a case for grant of anticipatory
bail.

7. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the
arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioner on bail on her
furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of

BAIL APPLN. 1169/2018 Page 2 of 3
the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating
Officer/SHO concerned. Petitioner shall not do anything that may
prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses. Petitioner shall
not leave the country without the permission of the Trial Court.

8. The Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
SEPTEMBER 24, 2018
rk

BAIL APPLN. 1169/2018 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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