- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 4 October 2012
- Bench
- A.K. Pathak
- Case no.
- BAIL APPLN. 582/2012
Follow Delhi High CourtFollow A.K. Pathak
Judgment
ORDER %
04.10.2012 One Ms. Jyotsana Sanhotra (hereinafter referred to as "deceased") committedsuicideby hangingon 17"^ February,2012 at her sister'shousein New Delhi. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the deceased was married to Kanwaljit Sanhotra, a British citizen of Indian origin on 12"^ May, 2006. Jaswant Singh Sanhotra and Rajinder Kaur Sanhotra are parents-in-law of deceased. After the marriage deceased joined her husband in London, U.K. in the year 2006 itself Parents-in-law were living in London but not with the complainant, that is, the deceased and Kanwaljit Sanhotra. Deceased used to visit India. A miscarriage took place s sj in the year 2009. Since then deceased had gone in depression. She was treated in North East London NHS Foundation Trust. Subsequently, a child was bom on 3'^'* October,2010 in London itself. On IS"" November,2011 deceased came to India and since then she had been living at her parents' housetill she died on 17'*'February,2012. As per the prosecution, deceased was not treated properly by her husband and in-laws during her stay with them in London. Husband of deceased was having an affair with his earlier wife. Husband and in-laws of the deceased used to taunt her. Her husband had also manhandled her on several occasions. In the month of April, 2011, deceased left her matrimonialhome and came to India for stayingwith her parents. On 7"^ April, 2011 Kanwaljit Sanhotra came to India to take her back, when he has admitted in writing that the deceased was mistreated by him and his parents and for this reason she had gone in depression. He assured that deceased would be kept in a happy and peaceful environment. This letter was written and signed by Kanwaljit Sanhotra in the presence of his mother, grandmother and the deceased. On this written assurance, deceased joined company of her husband at London. However, she was not kept properly even thereafter resultantly she returned back India on November, 2011. Jo I k I On22"^^November,2011, mother-in-lawof the deceasedvisitedthehouseof parents of deceased along with some other persons and created a scene. She also abused the deceased and her family members in respect whereof a complaint was made to Station House Officer, Police Station Janakpuri on 22"^^November,2011. In nutshell,caseofthe prosecutionis thatdeceased committed suicide since she was maltreated by the petitioners. Per contra, counsel for the petitioners has argued that the deceased had undergone depression on account of miscarriage. She was treated properly during her stay in the matrimonial home. She was provided proper medical treatment in London and entire medical expenses were borne by KanwajitSanhotra. Whiledeceasedwas inIndiaafter22"^^November,2011 petitioner had offered her ftill financial assistance and advised her to take medication from 'Ethos Healthcare' for depression. He even paid money to 'Ethos Healthcare'. He ftirther contends that it is the mother of deceased who insisted for treatment in G.B. Pant Hospital. Reliance has been placed by him on an email to Ethos Healthcare and Education as also the reply of the said hospital to show that petitioner Kanwaljit Sanhotra had done whatever he could have done to provide medical treatment to the deceased even duringher stay in India after 18^ November,2011. As regards letter written by him is concerned, it is contended that Kanwaljit Sanhotra was in love with the deceased and he wanted her to join his company in-London, thus, had written the letter, as was desired by the mother of deceased. On 22"^^November,2011 RajinderKaur Sanhotrahad goneto meetthe deceased in order to advise her to return to London and not to continue living in India, which was in the interest of deceased as well as the child. Kanwaljit had filed a complaint with the police in London that the deceased had taken away the child with her. As a counterblast to that complaint deceased filed a complaint on 22"*^ November, 2011 at the police station. The said complaintwas filedvide DD No. 55-A on 22"^November,2011 itself,since it was not seriously pursued by the deceased as Kanwaljit agreed not to pursue his complaint in London. It is further contended that for four months deceased was living separately at her parents' house, away fi-om her husband and his family members, thus, it cannot be said that the parents had abetted the deceased to commit suicide. Keeping in mind the totality of the circumstances, it is ordered that in case of arrest petitioners be released on bail, subject to each of them furnishing personal bond(s) in the sum of ^25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction ,4 a of Investigating Officer/Station House Officer concerned. Petitioners shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when they are called upon to do so. It is made clear that Kanwaljit Sanhotra shall not leave the country without seeking prior permission of the trial court. But this condition will not be applicable to other petitioners. Bail apphcations as well as miscellaneous applications are disposed of in the above terms. Dasti. OCTOBER 04, 2012 rb :k. pathak, j.
Case details
Parties and counsel
u $-16/17/18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 555/2012 and Crl. M.A. 6942/2012 (permission to leave India) KANWALJIT SANHOTRA Petitioner Through ;Mr. Viraj Datar and Mr. Pritpal Singh Nijjar, Advs. Versus STATE OF DELHI & ORS. Respondents Through :Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP with SI Amit Kumar, P.S. Hari Nagar AND + BAIL APPLN. 578/2012 and Crl. M.A. 6943/2012 (permission to leave India) JASWANT SINGH SANHOTRA Petitioner Through : Mr. Viraj Datar and Mr. Pritpal Singh Nijjar, Advs. versus STATE Respondent Through : Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP with SI Amit Kumar, P.S. Hari Nagar AND \ J + BAIL APPLN. 582/2012 and.Crl. M.A. 6941/2012 (permission to leave India) RAJINDER KAUR SANHOTRA Petitioner Through :Mr. Viraj Datar and Mr. Pritpal Singh Nijjar, Advs. Versus STATE Respondent Through : Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP with SI Amit Kumar, P.S. Hari Nagar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.