Delhi High Court
Rekha Tyagi vs State on 25 January, 2012
Author: Suresh Kait
$~49
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 1541/2011
% Judgment delivered on: 25th January, 2012
REKHA TYAGI ..... Petitioner
Through:Mr. Mohit Mathur and
Mr. Puneet Singh Arora, Advs.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through:Ms. Jasbir Kaur, APP for the State
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. The instant petition has been filed by the mother-in-law of the
deceased for grant of anticipatory bail.
2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage between
the deceased Komal Tyagi and Vijay Tyagi son of the petitioner herein
was solemnized on 11.05.2011. Thereafter, on 14.07.2011 the
deceased went to her parental house and on 21.07.2011 she committed
suicide by cutting wrists of her both the hands.
3. Ld. Counsel submits that there are two allegations against the
petitioner as enumerated in the FIR No. 248/2011 wherein a case under
Section 498-A/406/34 of IPC was registered at PS Dabri, Delhi.
4. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the complaint of the
father of the deceased who has stated in the complaint that since the
time of the marriage of his daughter her in-laws have been demanding
more dowry. Prior to few days of marriage, the in-laws of his daughter
came to know that they would gave them an Alto car so they demanded
a big car. He managed for a bigger car, as marriage preparations were
done and cards had already been distributed. They used to eat lot of
dishes but did not give to his daughter on the pretext that she would
become fat by eating. It is further alleged that a few days back only her
husband and father-in-law asked her to bring ` 2 lakhs as they have to
raise their grocery shop up to the standard of a complete store at Uttam
Nagar. It is further alleged that on 14.07.2011 the husband and father-
in-law of the deceased asked her to go for outing and when his
daughter seated in the car, her sister-in-law (nanad) brought a suitcase
of clothes and keep that in the car. After that they brought his daughter
to his home and left her saying that when she will bring ` 2 lakhs in
cash then only they will take her back.
5. It is further alleged in the complaint that at 10 P.M. on the day
before yesterday's night his son in-law called on his mobile no.
9810186264 and talked for a long time with his daughter. After
conversation his daughter remained lost for some time and started
crying. On asking, she refused to tell anything. Yesterday night his
daughter Komal slept with her mother on first floor. At about 2:30
P.M. in night her mother went to roof for filling water in four water
tanks, at that his daughter woke up and her mother asked her also to
come upstairs but she remained on her bed. After about half an hour
when his wife came back to her room and opened the door to approach
the bed she realized some liquid thing under her feet and her footwear
were sticking to it. When switching the lights on, she found that lot of
blood was spread over the bed, pillow and ground and voice of sobbing
was heard. His wife shouted and rushed to him and then they took
their daughter in their family car to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital where
doctor, after investigation, declared her dead.
6. Ld. Counsel further pointed out that in the charge-sheet against
the petitioner it is stated that the father of the deceased had booked a
Hyundai Accent car on 18.03.2011 whereas the allegations of
demanding a big car were made in the month of May, 2011. Therefore,
demanding a big car by the petitioner and his family members does not
arise.
7. Ld. Counsel further submits that the deceased died at the
parental house and when she was admitted in Mata Chanan Devi
Hospital the slip of articles prepared by the hospital of her belongs is
as under:-
"1. Bangles (Gold) - 6
2. Bangles (Red) - 2
3. Silver Pajeeb - 2
4. Ring (Gold) - 5
5. Ring (others) - 8
6. Mangal Sutre - 1
7. Chaine (Gold & Loket) - 1
8. Tread (Black) - 1
9. Nose Ring - 1
10. Ear Ring - 4
11. Ear other things - 3."
8. Ld. Counsel further submitted that if they would have been
torturing their daughter-in-law, there could not have been any question
of wearing that much of jewellery items by her as mentioned above.
Even otherwise, she committed suicide by cutting her wrists of both
the hands. Therefore, there is no connectivity of the demand of dowry
and the suicide.
9. Ld. Counsel lastly submitted that there are no specific
allegations against the petitioner, though allegations are made against
the other co-accused persons.
10. Ld. APP, on the other hand, submitted that they demanded
` 2 lakhs for upgrading their grocery shop and also demanded a big car
and they left the deceased at her parental house thereafter she remained
there only and due to the atrocities committed by her in-laws against
the deceased she committed suicide on 21.07.2011, just after two
months of the marriage.
11. Ld. APP further submitted that the petitioner has been avoiding
arrest and never joined investigation, except she attended investigation
only once during her interim bail. However, no investigation could be
carried out qua her.
12. I have perused the order dated 15.10.2011 whereby the bail
application of the petitioner was dismissed. In the order, nowhere it is
mentioned that she did not join the investigation during interim bail.
13. In the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, I
deem it fit to admit the petitioner on bail.
14. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be released on bail on
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ` 25,000/- with one surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
15. BAIL APPLN. 1541/2011 stands disposed of.
16. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J
JANUARY 25, 2012
RS
