Siddhant Tomar v. State

TALWANT SINGH, J OCTOBER 12, 2022/mr Click here to check corrigendum, if any

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order pronounced on 12.10.2022 + BAIL APPLN. 1215/2022 SIDDHANT TOMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Yash Prakash, Ishan Jain & Mr. Sanjay Srivastava, Advocates. versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. N.S.Bajwa, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH Talwant Singh, J.: 1. This is an application filed by the petitioner for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 241/2021, under Section 304-B/498-A/34 IPC, registered at P.S. Shahdara. 2. In para 2 of the brief facts, inadvertently the learned counsel for the petitioner has got pasted the contents of the earlier bail application, which was moved on behalf of the mother of the present petitioner. The copy of the FIR is on record, which was lodged by the family member of the deceased Charu. 2.1 The brief facts as narrated by the applicant, are that his marriage was solemnized with Charu (since deceased) on 14.05.2021 through one mediator Shri Pradeep Kumar Arya. 2.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the mother of the applicant demanded Rs.5,00,000/- in cash, Rs.1,75,000/- for furniture and Rs. 70,000/- for clothes. It was further alleged that the family of the deceased Charu also gave ornaments worth Rs. 4,50,000/- to the deceased at the time of marriage. After the marriage, the allegation is that the applicant and his mother demanded a car from the deceased and for that they used to give beatings to the deceased. 2.3. On 29.07.2021, the deceased went to her parental home as her mother had to undergo an operation. On 15.08.2021 in the evening, Charu was brought back by the applicant to her matrimonial home. 2.4. On 16.08.2021 in the evening, the complainant (father of the deceased) came to know that his daughter had fallen from a height and she was taken to the hospital, where she was declared brought dead. Apprehension was shown that Charu was thrown from the roof after being beaten. The applicant was arrested on 16.08.2021 and he is still in judicial custody. 2.5. It has been submitted that the charge-sheet stands filed and the bail application moved by the present petitioner was dismissed on 11.04.2022 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. 2.6 The bail has been prayed on the grounds that the learned ASJ has failed to appreciate that the deceased was at her parents' house from 29.07.2021 till 15.08.2021 even as per the allegations contained in the FIR, it has been wrongly appreciated by the learned ASJ that when the mother of the deceased was operated, the present petitioner did not send the deceased to her parents' home; the petitioner had brought back his wife after 18 days of the operation of her mother; there is a delay of 33-34 days in recording of the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C., which shows that allegations are afterthought and they are concocted and false; there are clear contradictions and improvements in the FIR and the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C.; all the allegations against the petitioner of beating the deceased for demand of car are false and they have been made to falsely implicate the petitioner and his mother. 2.7 A suicide note of the deceased was found by the mother of the petitioner and it was sent to FSL and the FSL report verified that the said suicide note was in handwriting of the deceased; the allegations that the deceased was beaten up and there were abrasions on the body of the deceased are false as all the said injuries were caused by blunt force/surface impact on the body as mentioned in the post-mortem report the deceased as fallen down from the 5th floor. 2.8 It is further mentioned that the marriage had taken place through a Mediator Sh. Pradeep Kumar Arya, who is an independent witness in the present case. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C; he has stated that the mother of the petitioner did not make any demand of dowry but father of the deceased wanted to give Rs.5 lakhs to the mother of the present petitioner and he has categorically stated that there was not