REKHA RANI Vs. STATE (NCT) OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DD No 48A dtd. 12/3/2016 was got lodged by Duty Constable posted at Acharaya Bhikshu Govt. Hospital, Delhi regarding one woman namely, Rajni Babbar (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased" -) was admitted by her father vide MLC No. 13290/16 and was declared brought dead in the hospital. DD No 48A was entrusted to SI Vikas Mudgil (hereinafter referred as "the Investigation Officer" -) who conducted the proceedings under Sec. 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code" -) and recorded the statement of the family members of the deceased. Initially, the family members did not report any suspicion about her death but after few days of the incident i.e. on 3/7/2016, the father namely Madan Mohan Babbar of the deceased handed over a suicide note which was found later in the house. The father of the deceased on basis of the suicide note alleged that life of the deceased daughter was made miserable by their relatives with whom they have property disputes in Panipat and the deceased could not bear the atrocities and committed suicide. The Investigating Officer has also visited the relatives at their native place in Panipat to make enquiry into the allegations levelled against them collected details/documents of the cases/complaints between the deceased and the relatives. Accordingly with the approval of the DCP/West on dtd. 19/9/2016 fresh statement of Madan Mohan Babbar (hereinafter referred to as "the complainant" -) was recorded by the Investigating Officer.

(2.) The Court of Shahabuddin, Additional Sessions Judge, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court" -) vide order dtd. 24/4/2019 (hereinafter referred to as "the impugned order" -) passed the order on framing of charge which is reproduced verbatim as under:-

(3.) The petitioners being aggrieved by the impugned order filed the present petition on the grounds that the charges have been framed without any factual foundation as the contents of the alleged suicide note do not either refer or make out the offence against the petitioners. There is no whisper in the suicide note about the petitioners that they abetted or instigated the suicide of the deceased. The parameters of the sec. 107 IPC have not been made out. There is no averment in the suicide note that the petitioners had caused any harm to the deceased or were responsible for the commission of suicide by the deceased. The Trial Court has failed to appreciate that the deceased was dissatisfied from her life and was appearing to a negative personality. The civil litigation started by the mother of the deceased was decided in her favor and the criminal complaint cases filed against the accused Anil and Krishan Kumar were also dismissed in the year 2013 and 2014. The framing of the charge against the petitioners is contrary to the law.