Amit Dahiya v. State NCT of Delhi

ORDER %

18.11.2011 Crl.M. A.18003/2011(Exem ption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Criminal M.A. stands disposed of CrLRev. P.516/2011 & Crl.M.A.18002/2011(stay)

¶1Learned counsel for the petitioner submits in the present case, FIR No.25/2011 was registered on the statement of father of victim under Section .498A IPC only Whereas charge under Section 498A/406/307 IPC i . has been framed by learned Trial Court against the petitioner. CRL.REV.P. 516/2011 Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

¶2Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that the victim was discharged from the hospital on the same day, however her statement was recorded by the police after a gap of five days from the date of alleged incident.

¶3He further submitted that apartfrom the fact that victim has left the handwritten note in Hindi language which is Annexure D placed at page No.24 of the paper-book, the English translation of which is at page No.26,which reads as under:- "Beingfed up with myparents, my in-laws I am committing suicide."

¶4Beside the above suicide note, learned counsel for petitioner has also referred to the opinion of the concerned Doctor on the MLC of the victim which is Annexure C from Dr.Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi - 110085 which reads as under:- "Thepattern ofthe ligature mark is consistent with hanging."

¶5Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner has filed a complaint case under Section 309 IPG against the victim and she has committed the offence, which is still pending adjudication before the CRL.REVP. 516/2011 Trial Court.

¶6Additionally,learnedcounselfor the petitionerhas alsoreferredto the DD No.3A dated 17.01.2011whereby the information had been given to the concerned police station that the victim had hanged herself. He further submittedthat during the investigation,the police addedthe section406/307 IPG.

¶7Mr.Navin Sharma, learned APP on the other hand submits that the information vide DD No.3A was given by the petitioner, who is none else but the husband of the victim and answerable to the said episode, therefore, he deliberately transmitted this information only just to create false evidence in his favour, taking undue advantage of unconscious stage of the petitioner.

¶8Further submitted that the information at the police station was given by the concerned doctor of Bhagwati hospital, which is a private hospital situated in Sector-13, Rohini, Delhi itself, however, the nearest government hospital is at a distance of just 1Vi KM away i.e. Dr.Bhim Rao Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi. He further submitted that the suicide note Annexure D has not been seized by the 10, therefore, it is not the part of the CRL.RE V.P. 516/2011 Page 3 of5 prosecutiondocument,therefore,he cannotcommentonthis note.

¶9Learned APP has rehed upon State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath PadhiAIR 2005 SC 359 wherein it has been held as under;- "23. As a result of aforesaid discussion, in our view, clearly the law is that at the time offraming charge of taking cognizance the accused has no right to produce any material. Satish Mehra's case holding that the trial Court has powers to consider even materials which accused may produce at the stage of Section 227 of the Code has not been correctly decided. "

¶10Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has filed the complaint case under Section 309 IPC which is pending adjudicationbefore the Trial Court and all his defencehas been pleadedby him therein.

¶11At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file appropriate application at the appropriate time. CRL.REV.P. 516/2011 Page 4 of5

¶12Liberty,as prayedby learnedcounselfor the petitioner, granted.

¶13Dismissed as withdrawn. SURESH KAIT, J NOVEMBER 18, 2011 CRL.REV.P. 516/2011 Page 5 of5

$-27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 516/2011 AMIT DAHIYA Petitioner Through : Mr.B.S.Rana, Adv versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent Through : Mr.Navin Sharma, AFP for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT