Anand Prakash @ Hazari vs State
2010 Latest Caselaw 2522 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+     W.P.(CRL) 1602/2007

      ANAND PRAKASH @ HAZARI                    ..... Petitioner
                     Through         Mr. Hari Singh Devyada, Advocate.
               versus
      STATE                                   ..... Respondent
                     Through         Mr. Saleem Ahmad, Additional Standing
                                     Counsel with SI Chandra Prakash, PS Crime
                                     Branch.
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

                               ORDER

% On 16th February, 2007 at about 8.08 P.M. an information was received in

the police control room at Police Station Vasant Kunj regarding an accident near

Shiv Murti Temple Flyover and that an injured was lying at the said place. ASI

Dharampal and Constable Ganga Ram reached the place of incident but they

found that neither the injured nor the complainant was present there. In the

meanwhile, at 9.35 P.M. an information was received from Safdarjung Hospital at

Police Station Vasant Kunj that one injured, namely, Jagmohan S/o Hazari Lal R/o

Village Rangpuri, Delhi had been admitted by ASI Ranbir Singh, Incharge of PCR

Van Zebra-51, after sustaining injuries in an accident. This information was sent

to ASI Dharampal for necessary action. ASI Dharampal went to Safdarjung

Hospital and made inquiries. The injured was unfit for statement. Thereafter, ASI

Crl.M.C.1602/2007 Page 1 Dharampal made inquiries in Village Rangpuri, Mahipalpur but the address of the

injured could not be located and then he returned to the place of incident. No eye

witness could be found at the place of incident. ASI Dharampal returned back to

the police station and DD entries were made.

2. On 18th February, 2007 at about 10.30 A.M., the petitioner, Mr. Hazari Lal

met ASI Dharampal. The petitioner, Mr. Hazari Lal and ASI Dharampal visited

Safdarjung Hospital and the petitioner identified the injured as his son Mr.

Jagmohan, who was under treatment. On 18th February, 2007, the injured was

found unfit for recording statement. A case under Section 279/337 of the Indian

Penal Code at Police Station, Vasant Kunj was registered.

3. On 19th February, 2007, injured Mr. Jagmohan expired in the hospital. Post

mortem was conducted and thereafter dead body of Mr. Jagmohan was handed

over to the petitioner for cremation. Accordingly, Section 337 of the Indian Penal

Code was changed to Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code.

4 The petitioner in the present petition has made allegations that late Mr.

Jagmohan had got married to Ms. Radha from Garhwal on 2nd December, 2001.

According to him, the present case is not a case of a road traffic accident. The

petitioner suspects involvement of his daughter-in-law i.e. Ms. Radha, her brother

Manoj, mother of Ms. Radha, Ms. Saraswati and one Mr. Rana. It is alleged that

Crl.M.C.1602/2007 Page 2 Mr. Rana has illicit relationship with Ms. Radha. It is also stated that there was no

question Mr. Jagmohan going to Rajokri Flyover on 16th February, 2007, which is

located far away and Mr. Jagmohan use to take a different route. It may be noted

that Mr. Jagmohan and Ms. Radha have a minor daughter Anjali and the

petitioner has asked for custody of the said minor daughter, which is contested by

Ms. Radha.

5. In view of the allegations made and as it was alleged that the Investigating

officer, Police Station Vasant Kunj had not conducted proper investigation, vide

order dated 23rd July, 2009 it was directed that the matter be transferred to Crime

Branch of Delhi Police for proper investigation. The Crime Branch of Delhi Police

has filed two status reports dated 6th October, 2009 and 22nd February, 2010. In

the status report dated 6th October, 2009, it is pointed out that one Mr. Ajay

Sharma had informed the police control room about the accident on 16th

February, 2007 at about 8 P.M. when he was coming from Gurgaon to Delhi via

National Highway-8. He told the police that he had seen a person lying near

Rajoukri Flyover. According to Mr. Ajay Sharma, this was a case of road traffic

accident. The police also made inquiries from Ms. Radha. She in turn had made

allegations against the petitioner that the petitioner herein and his wife threw her

out from the house at Rangpuri Village. She has also stated that her father-in-law

Crl.M.C.1602/2007 Page 3 Mr. Anand Prakash @ Hazari is making false allegations against her as he does not

want to give any share in the property to her and her daughter. In the status

report, it is stated that during investigation it has came to light that the deceased

Mr. Jagmohan was living at Rangpuri Village and was working at a farm house at

Samalkha, Delhi and the place of accident is enroute to his place of work.

6. In the second status report dated 22nd February, 2010, it is stated that polygraphic tests of Ms. Radha and her brother Mr. Manoj were conducted on 18th and 19th November, 2009, respectively and as per the report received, both persons were found to be truthful and as per analysis of Polygraphs, they were not involved in the death of Mr. Jagmohan.

7. In view of the aforesaid position, it is apparent that the respondent-State

has conducted investigation, but till date they have not come across any evidence

or material to substantiate the allegations made by the petitioner. The crime

branch will process and complete investigation in accordance with law. In these

circumstances, no further order or direction is required to be passed in the

present writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

      MAY 11, 2010
      NA/J




Crl.M.C.1602/2007                                                              Page 4