Delhi High Court
Anil Kumar Talan vs State Goverment Nct Of Delhi on 12 July, 2022
#
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Order reserved on: 11.07.2022
Order delivered on: 12.07.2022
+ BAIL APPLN. 1820/2022
ANIL KUMAR TALAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Mohit Mathur, Sr. Advocate with
Mr.Harsh Gautam, Mr.Vinayak
Chitale, Mr.Devesh Kumar Malan and
Mr.M. Rais Farooqui, Advocates.
versus
STATE (GOVERMENT NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through: Ms.Rajni Gupta, APP for State with
SI Shubham Saini, P.S.: Pandav
Nagar.Mr.Yash Anand and
Mr.Shenoy Das, Advocates for the
complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
ORDER
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
1. This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of
anticipatory bail to the applicant/petitioner in FIR No.0597/2020 under
Sections 182/192/195/203/389/420/469/470/471/500/120-B/34 IPC
registered at PS: Pandav Nagar, Delhi.
2. In brief, as per the case of the prosecution, aforesaid FIR was
registered on the complaint of Ms.Brijesh Devi wife of Dharmender Singh
Signature Not Verified
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:12.07.2022
17:21:58
on 26.12.2020 wherein she alleged that Ms.Komal daughter of Shri Anil
Talan (petitioner in the present petition) was married to her elder son
Abhishek Kumar on 20.04.2018. Further, Komal Talan was not willing to
live with Abhishek Kumar and in order to extort money from them, she
hatched a conspiracy in association with her family members including the
present petitioner and her friend Tushar Chaturvedi. In order to execute the
plan to disappear from the matrimonial home, she gave false information
regarding her suicide. In between, the family members of Komal Talan
registered a case bearing FIR No.1479/2019 dated 06.07.2019 under
Sections 498-A/364 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at PS: Indirapuram,
Ghaziabad, UP against Abhishek Kumar and other family members.
Abhishek Kumar was consequently arrested and is presently on bail in the
aforesaid case.
On the basis of aforesaid complaint of Ms.Brijesh Devi, the present
FIR No.0597/2020 was registered at PS: Pandav Nagar, Delhi.
3. It is further the case of the prosecution that Komal Talan firstly went
to Jaipur, Rajasthan by bus and from there she booked a railway ticket.
Further, she went to Mumbai by flight and from there, she went to Bangalore
by train. She was subsequently recovered by the STF team of Ghaziabad,
UP. Further, at the time of booking of train ticket, Komal Talan used her
new mobile number 9971480551 and alternate number as 9990191335. In
the CAF, subscriber of mobile number 9971480551 is Kamakshi D/o Anil
Talan and alternate number 9990191335 is mentioned to be of co-accused
Tushar Chaturvedi.
4. During investigation, CDRs were obtained and mobile number
Signature Not Verified
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:12.07.2022
17:21:58
9971480551 of Kamakshi (used by Komal Talan) was found to be in touch
with mobile number 9990191335 of co-accused Tushar Chaturvedi. Also,
the aforesaid mobile number of Tushar Chaturvedi was found to be in touch
with mobile number 9818573035 used by Rajat Talan (brother of Komal
Talan) and 9997066979 used by Anil Talan (i.e. present petitioner). It is also
the case of the prosecution that during the course of investigation, it was
revealed that mobile number 9971480551 used by Komal Talan was
purchased by her from Ram Nagar near Ghaziabad on the basis of fake
Aadhar Card in the name of Kamakshi, which does not exist as per UIDAI
records.
5. Further, during the course of investigation, accused Tushar Chaturvedi
was arrested on 17.12.2021, who made a disclosure statement. Also,
statement of one Nizamuddin was recorded who stated that mobile number
9997066979 is in his name and the SIM had been handed over to Anil Talan
(petitioner).
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that marriage of Komal
Talan was solemnized with Abhishek Kumar (son of the complainant) on
20.04.2018 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and an Audi car along with
cash and other articles were given in the marriage. However, the daughter of
the petitioner was subjected to cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry
and under distress and depression, Komal Talan left the matrimonial home,
without knowing the consequences, on 05.07.2019 leaving the car near
Hindon river. It is further submitted that since the petitioner's daughter
(Komal Talan) did not inform her mother or the petitioner as to leaving the
matrimonial home, the complaint was lodged with the police for legal action
Signature Not Verified
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:12.07.2022
17:21:58
and accordingly FIR No.1479/2019 was registered on 06.07.2019 under
Sections 498-A/323/364 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at PS:
Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, UP. Further, when the petitioner's daughter came
back and made a statement that she left on her own, the offence of
kidnapping was deleted from the said FIR No.1479/2019. Further, the
matter between the parties was settled on 14.07.2019 whereby a total sum of
Rs.68 lacs was to be paid by the groom side to the bride side and the parties
also agreed to filing of petition for divorce by mutual consent. It is further
contended that after getting the bail in FIR No.1479/2019, on the basis of
compromise, a false and frivolous complaint has been filed for registration of
FIR. It is also claimed that since the husband of the complainant in the
present FIR is a police official, pressure is being made to withdraw FIR
No.1479/2019 registered at PS: Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, UP. Further, the
petitioner is stated to have joined the investigation and it is submitted that
custodial interrogation is not required. It is further contended that phone
number allegedly linked to the petitioner neither belongs to him nor was ever
used by him. The alleged disclosure statement of co-accused Tushar
Chaturvedi, on the basis of which the custodial interrogation of the petitioner
is sought, is stated to be inadmissible. Further, reliance is placed upon
Kamal Kishore v. State Through Delhi Administration, 1997 Cri LJ 2106.
7. On the other hand, application is vehemently opposed by learned APP
for the State and reliance is placed upon the evidence as collected during the
course of investigation and referred in the preceding paragraphs. It is further
submitted that petitioner is to be interrogated for recovery of suicide note
which was left by Komal Talan in Scorpio car parked near Hindon river but
Signature Not Verified
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:12.07.2022
17:21:58
could not be subsequently found during the course of investigation and is
crucial to the case of the prosecution. It is further contended that aforesaid
suicide note was also corroborated by the petitioner as revealed from the
CCTV footage of the news channels India TV, Aaj Tak and News 24.
Proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. are stated to have been carried against
the petitioner and in the meantime he was granted interim protection by the
learned Sessions Court and application for anticipatory bail was finally
dismissed on 24.05.2022. It has also been pointed out that no interim
protection was granted to Komal Talan vide order dated 31.05.2022 by this
Court on her application for anticipatory bail.
8. I have given considered thought to the contentions raised.
At the outset, it may be noticed that Abhishek Kumar S/o the
complainant remained in custody on the basis of fabrication of incident of
disappearance made by Komal Talan. The interim protection to Komal
Talan in the aforesaid facts and circumstances has already been declined by
this Court during the pendency of her application for anticipatory bail. So
far as the present application is concerned, the petitioner's connivance is
supported by the fact that mobile number 9997066979 used by him was
provided by Nizamuddin as disclosed during investigation.
At this stage, it cannot be ignored that Komal Talan was in touch with
the family members during the aforesaid period and consequently Abhishek
Kumar remained in custody. Also, the matter appears to have been
highlighted in media on the basis of alleged suicide note, which the
prosecution seeks to recover.
Signature Not Verified
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:12.07.2022
17:21:58
A bare perusal of aforesaid factual position reveals that to wreak
vengeance for oblique motive, the incident of alleged suicide was fabricated.
The same not only led to ignominy, adverse media coverage and misery to
the family of complainant but also resulted in undue incarceration of
Abhishek Kumar (husband of Komal Talan). The criminal proceedings were
initiated as a gross abuse of the process of law. The implication and
consequences of such conduct may not have been fully visualized by the
petitioner at the aforesaid time but the uncalled for detention of Abhishek
Kumar definitely ruined the chances of settlement. The law appears to have
been used as a weapon than a shield by fabricating the incident of
disappearance and suicide.
I am of the considered view that a serious view needs to be taken of
such incidents to ensure that social fabric is not ruined by such fabrication of
facts. If false implication by fabricated omnibus allegations against entire
family in the course of matrimonial disputes and differences, is allowed, it
may lead to further misuse of the process of law and assume serious
proportions.
Considering the grave nature of allegations and the fact that criminal
proceedings under Section 364 IPC were falsely initiated, in connivance, I do
not find the case to be fit for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
The application is accordingly dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA)
JUDGE
JULY 12, 2022/SD
Signature Not Verified
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:12.07.2022
17:21:58
