Delhi High Court
Suraj Malik vs The State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 15 February, 2023
Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/001062
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 06th February, 2023
Pronounced on: 15th February, 2023
+ BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
SURAJ MALIK ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. R.S. Malik, Mr. Sahil Malik,
Mr. Sidhant Ranta, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the State with
S.I. Sukhvir Singh, P.S. Paschim Vihar
West.
Mr. Ravinder Singh, Advocate for
deceased‟s parents.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
JUDGMENT
AMIT SHARMA, J.
1. Present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 („CrPC‟) seeks grant of regular bail in case FIR
No. 591/2022 under Sections 498A/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(„IPC‟), registered at PS Paschim Vihar, Delhi.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
i. On 27.06.2022, a PCR call was received at PS Paschim Vihar, Delhi,
stating that one patient, namely Shefali (deceased), has been admitted
on account of burn injuries. Subsequently, the deceased was referred to
Safdarjung Hospital for further treatment.
BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
Digitally Signed
By:ANITA BAITAL
Signing Date:15.02.2023
15:17:08
Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/001062
ii. On reaching the hospital, it was revealed that the victim/Shefali got
married on 23.11.2021, which was less than seven years and therefore,
SDM Punjabi Bagh was informed about the same. On receipt of
information, SDM Punjabi Bagh reached Safdarjung Hospital and
recorded the statement of the patient, namely Shefali Malik (deceased),
wherein she stated:
"मेरा नाम शेफाली मललक है । मेरे पलि का नाम सूरज मललक है । मेरी
शादी सूरज मललक से 23/11/2021 को हुई थी। मेरी उम्र 28 वर्ष है । मैं
35 पलिम एनक्लेव, पलिम लवहार अपने ससुराल में थी आज। मैं
petrol लाई खुद और मैंने अपने उपर petrol डाल कर आग लगा ली
क्ोोंलक मैं जीना नही ों चाहिी। मेरी सास मुझे बहुि परे शान करिी
थी। दहे ज नहीों मााँ गिी थी पर बाि बाि पर सुनािी थी। पलि भी बहुि
गाली गलोच करिे थे। ससुर नहीों है । ननद है । उससे मुझे कुछ
लशकायि नहीों। वह कुछ नहीों कहिी थी मेरी सास ने ही मुझे बहुि
परे शान लकया लजसके कारण मैं जीना नहीों चाहिी।"
The English translation of the said statement is as under:
"My name is Shefali Malik. My Husband‟s name is Suraj
Malik. I got married to Suraj Malik on 23.11.2021. My age is
28 years. I was at 35, Paschim Enclave, Pashchim Vihar, at my
matrimonial home today and I got petrol and poured the same
on myself and set myself on fire because I do not want to live.
My mother-in-law harasses me. She does not demand dowry
but she constantly taunts me. My husband, Suraj Malik, abuses
me. Father-in-law is not there. Sister-in-law is there. I do not
have any complaint against her as she does not say anything.
My mother-in-law harasses me because of which I do not want
to live."
BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
Digitally Signed
By:ANITA BAITAL
Signing Date:15.02.2023
15:17:08
Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/001062
iii. Consequently, FIR 591/2022 under Sections 498/306/34 of the IPC was
registered and investigation was taken up.
iv. During the course of the investigation, statement of parents of the
deceased, i.e., Sh. Krishan Kumar Khanna and Smt. Ranjana Khanna
was recorded by the SDM, Punjabi Bagh, in which they alleged that
husband and mother-in-law of the deceased harassed their daughter and
demanded dowry. They alleged that the present applicant and his
mother, i.e., Smt. Sunita Malik, burned their daughter Shefali.
v. In the statement, the father of the deceased also mentioned that it was
deceased and applicant‟s second marriage, which they conducted with
great pomp and show on 23.11.2021, by spending approximately
Rs. 20,00,000/-.
vi. It is further stated that in February 2022, the deceased told her parents
that her in-laws are demanding Rs. 25,00,000/- and therefore, they had
given cash in the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- to the deceased.
vii. It is also stated that the deceased got pregnant in April but her in-laws
gave her medicine and got her aborted as the applicant, who already has
a son from his previous marriage, did not want to have another child.
viii. It is further stated that on 26.06.2022, the deceased received her
pregnancy report, which was positive, and she informed about the same
to her parents on the next morning.
ix. It is also alleged that on the applicant being informed about the
pregnancy, he stopped talking to the deceased and despite her not being
well, fought with her.
x. It is further alleged that the applicant started demanding Rs. 15,00,000/-
which were pending, on the night of 26.06.2022.
BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
Digitally Signed
By:ANITA BAITAL
Signing Date:15.02.2023
15:17:08
Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/001062
xi. After the completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed before the
Court of competent jurisdiction, and vide order dated 21.01.2023, the
learned trial Court framed charges against the present applicant and his
mother under Sections 498A/304B/34 of the IPC and in the alternate
charge under Sections 306/34 of the IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the statement made by
the father of the deceased is in total variation to the dying declaration given
by the deceased before the SDM, wherein it is categorically stated by her that
although she has been harassed by her mother-in-law and the applicant but
there has not been any demand of dowry. It is further submitted that it was the
second marriage of both, the applicant and the deceased, and that the deceased
was not happy with her matrimonial life.
4. It is further submitted that the statement made by the parents of the
deceased were deliberately made so that Section 304B could be added to the
FIR, since the initial FIR was registered under Section 306 of the IPC.
Further, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that even Section 306
would not be made out as there were no allegations with respect to any
instigation or abetment to suicide against the present applicant. It is further
submitted that even in the statement of the parents of the deceased, no specific
allegation with regard to the conduct of the applicant demonstrating that he
abetted or instigated the deceased to commit suicide were made.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has also drawn
the attention of this Court to the statement by one Mr. Kaveshwar Singh, who
was the neighbor of the applicant and had taken the deceased to the hospital.
It is submitted that in the said statement it has been recorded that the parents
of the deceased arrived at Safdarjung Hospital and started quarreling with the
BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
Digitally Signed
By:ANITA BAITAL
Signing Date:15.02.2023
15:17:08
Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/001062
present applicant and his family members and thereafter, the deceased told
them that the present applicant will stay with her. It is submitted that the said
statement shows that even at that time, the deceased had faith in the present
applicant.
6. Learned counsel also submits that investigation in the present case is
complete and chargesheet stands filed, therefore, no useful purpose will be
served by keeping the present applicant in judicial custody. It is further
asserted that the applicant has roots in society and owns a shop in Nangloi. He
has a four year old son from previous marriage to look after. He has been in
judicial custody since 28.06.2022.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant relies upon the
following decisions:
i. Ranjeet Singh v. State, 2005 (2) J.C.C. 905
ii. Kamal @ Kailash Joshi v. State, 2007 I.A.D. (Delhi) 31
iii. Nitin Kumar v. State, 2015 IVAD (Delhi) 109
iv. Deepak v. State, 120 (2005) D.L.T 146
8. Per contra, learned APP for the State, assisted by learned counsel for
the deceased‟s parents, submits that the allegations made by the parents of the
deceased are very grave in nature. There is specific and clear demand of
dowry with regard to the applicant. It is further submitted that on the morning
of the incident, the deceased had called her father and conveyed the demand
being made by the present applicant and also conveyed the manner she was
being treated on account of her pregnancy.
9. It is further submitted that even in the dying declaration made by the
deceased, she categorically states that she was being harassed by the applicant
and his mother.
BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
Digitally Signed
By:ANITA BAITAL
Signing Date:15.02.2023
15:17:08
Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/001062
10. It is further submitted that the charges under Sections 498/304B/34 and
in the alternate 306/34 of the IPC have already been framed in respect of
applicant and his mother.
11. It is submitted that the parents of the deceased are to be examined by
learned trial Court and therefore, in view of the aforesaid reasons, the present
bail application should be dismissed.
12. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
13. The applicant got married to the deceased on 23.11.2021 and
admittedly, it was their second marriage.
14. It is pertinent to mention that the dying declaration of the deceased is
an important piece of evidence in the present case. Learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the applicant submits that the allegation with respect to invoking
the provision of Section 304B of the IPC, made by the parents of the
deceased, cannot be looked into as it is diametrically opposite to the statement
given in the dying declaration by the deceased with respect to demand of
dowry.
15. Perusal of the said dying declaration which has been reproduced
hereinabove categorically states that there was no demand of dowry, in fact,
the deceased while alleging that her mother-in-law harassed her, clarifies the
same by saying that she does not demand dowry but continues to taunt her.
The allegation with respect to her husband is regarding verbal abuse, and in
the end she states that she does not want to live because of the harassment by
her mother-in-law.
16. On the other hand, the statement of the parents of the deceased
recorded after registration of the FIR, alleges that in-laws of their daughter
BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
Digitally Signed
By:ANITA BAITAL
Signing Date:15.02.2023
15:17:08
Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/001062
had demanded Rs. 25,00,000/- out of which Rs. 10,00,000/- have already
been paid.
17. Perusal of the aforesaid dying declaration made by the deceased
reflects that the deceased was not happy at her matrimonial home, more
specifically, with her relation with her mother-in-law, but at the same time the
fact that she did not make any allegation with respect to demand of dowry
made by the present applicant cannot be lost sight of.
18. Whether the statement made by the father of the deceased with respect
to the demand of Rs. 25,00,000/- by the applicant and his mother or whether
Rs. 10,00,000/- cash was paid to the applicant is a matter of trial, which the
prosecution need to prove by leading evidence in support thereof.
19. Chargesheet has been filed and charges have been framed in the present
case. Matter is fixed for prosecution evidence.
20. So far as the plea of the prosecution is concerned with regard to the
present applicant threatening or influencing the witness or evading the trial,
no material has been placed on record to substantiate the same.
21. Applicant is in judicial custody since 28.06.2022 and no useful purpose
will be served by keeping the applicant in judicial custody any further.
22. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, the
application is allowed.
23. The applicant is admitted to bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) alongwith one surety of the
like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Link Court, further
subject to the following terms and conditions:
i. The memo of parties shows that the applicant is residing at H. No. 35,
Paschim Enclave, New Delhi. In case of any change of address, the
BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
Digitally Signed
By:ANITA BAITAL
Signing Date:15.02.2023
15:17:08
Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/001062
applicant is directed to inform the same to the learned Trial Court and
the Investigating Officer.
ii. The applicant shall not leave India without the prior permission of the
learned Trial Court.
iii. The applicant is directed to give all his mobile numbers to the
Investigating Officer and keep them operational at all times.
iv. The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, tamper with evidence or
try to influence the witnesses in any manner.
v. The applicant shall join the investigation, as and when required by the
Investigating Officer.
vi. In case it is established that the applicant tried to tamper with the
evidence, the bail granted to the applicant shall stand cancelled
forthwith.
24. Needless to state, nothing mentioned hereinabove is an opinion on the
merits of the case.
25. The application is allowed and disposed of accordingly alongwith all
the pending application(s), if any.
AMIT SHARMA
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 15th, 2023/sn
BAIL APPLN. 3475/2022
Digitally Signed
By:ANITA BAITAL
Signing Date:15.02.2023
15:17:08
