The Delhi High Court dismissed an application for anticipatory bail. The court held that specific dowry-related allegations and the necessity of custodial interrogation at the preliminary investigation stage justified rejecting the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~60
KRISHNA DEVI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sachin Sharma, Adv.
versus
GNCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Addl. PP for the State with Inspr. Rajender
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R % 11.01.2018
Crl. M.A. 568/2018 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
BAIL APPLN. 74/2018
BAIL APPLN. 74/2018
Page 1
at her house. The FIR further contends that the complainant received a call from one of the neighbours that her daughter had attempted to commit suicide and had been shifted to BSA Hospital. On reaching BSA Hospital they found that their daughter had passed away. In these circumstances, the complaint has been registered contending that they suspect the petitioner and her son of having instigated her daughter to commit suicide.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JANUARY 11, 2018 ‘ rs’
BAIL APPLN. 74/2018
Page 2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case disclosing dowry death allegations instigating suicide.
Whether custodial interrogation is unreasonably delayed at the preliminary investigation stage.
Whether imputations against the petitioner in the FIR justify denying anticipatory bail.
Krishna Devi
GNCT of Delhi
Sanjeev Sachdeva
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
