Interim Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 1
SC No. 162/2023
State Vs. Ansar
FIR No. 271/2023
PS: Dayal Pur
01.12.2023
ORDER ON THE PROTEST PETITION FILED BY THE
APPLICANT SAMIR MALIK (SON OF COMPLAINANT
ALLAH NOOR KHAN)
1. This order of mine will disposed of protest petition
filed by Sh. Samir Malik, who is the son of the complainant, Sh.
Allah Noor Khan.
2. Brief facts of the case in hand are that in the case in
hand, the FIR U/s. 304-B/498-A/34 of IPC was registered on the
statement of Sh. Allah Noor Khan recorded by the Executed
Magistrate on dated 24.03.2023, wherein, he has stated that the
marriage of his daughter Imrana was solemnized with Ansar
about two years and few months ago in the year 2020 that too in
the lock-down. He has alleged that after some time of this
marriage, the accused Ansar and his other family's members
started demanded buffalo in dowry. He has also alleged that his
son-in-law Ansar used to beat his daughter after consuming
liquor. He has also alleged that about one and half years ago, in
the month of December 2021, when he went to meet Imrana in
her house alongwith his wife and son, then accused Ansar and his
family's member had beaten them. He has also alleged that Ansar
used to beat Imrana after consuming liquor and his family's
-- 1 of 8 --
2
members also used to abuse and beat Imrana. He has also stated
that on dated 24.03.2023, a known person of Ansar had phoned
him at 1:30 AM and told that Imrana had committed suicide and
further stated that Imrana used to reside at house No. B-69, Gali
No. 3, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi and family's members of Ansar
also used to reside with Imrana. He has also stated that when
they phoned to Ansar, then it was revealed that Ansar had taken
Imrana at GTB hospital. He has also stated that when they
arrived at the GTB hospital, then none of family's member of
Ansar was found in the GTB hospital. It is also stated that he
suspects that Ansar, father-in-law of Imrana, mother-in-law,
Nanand and three Devars of Imrana had killed her and prayed for
taking strict legal action against them, so that his daughter
Imrana may get justice. Accordingly, on the same day that on
dated 24.03.2023, FIR No. 271/2023 was registered U/s. 304-
B/498-A/34 of IPC.
3. The investigation was carried out and accused Ansar
was arrested on dated 25.03.2023 and on the completion of the
investigation, the charge-sheet was filed U/s. 304-B/498-A of
IPC only against Ansar, whereas, Mohd. Israel, Nisaran, Mohd.
Sajid, Saista were kept in column no. 12 (being not charge-
sheeted).
4. Accordingly, case against Ansar was committed to
the court of Sessions and this case is assigned to this court.
5. Sh. Samir Malik, brother of the deceased Imrana has
filed the protest petition/objections against the Investigating
-- 2 of 8 --
3
Officer, wherein it is stated that initially marriage of the deceased
Ms. Imrana and younger sister Ms. Ashiya was fixed with the
accused Ansar and his brother Sajid respectively on dated
27.06.2022, but, due to demand of dowry, the accused Israel
refused to perform the marriage of his son Sajid with Ms. Ashiya
on the date of marriage i.e. on dated 27.06.2022. He has also
stated that there are number of incidents of cruelties, threat to
kill, beatings, quarrel, demand of dowry by the accused Ansar,
Isreal, Nisaran, but, the concerned IO did not mentioned these
incidents in the charge-sheet. He has further stated that on dated
27.06.2022, 06.09.2020, 08.09.2020, 05.12.2020, 03.06.2021,
26.07.2021, 28.08.2021, 13.04.2022 and 15.04.2022, but, IO did
not mention single incident in the charge-sheet and further stated
that he concealed the above noted facts from this court, as, stated
above, which are necessary to bring on the record.
6. It is also stated in the application that this applicant
had also filed a complaint dated 03.08.2023 (Annexure 'A') to the
DCP, PS Seelampur, Delhi. But, no action has been taken by the
concerned IO/SHO till date. Hence, the present protest petition is
filed and the applicant has prayed to direct the Investigating
Officer to file the additional charge-sheet against Ansar and
Mohd. Israel, Ms. Nisaran, Mohd. Sajid, Shahesta.
7. The accused Ansar has filed the reply to this protest
petition stating therein that the Samir Malik has filed the present
protest petition with the ulterior motive and afterthought, which
is false and frivolous. It is also stated that the present protest
-- 3 of 8 --
4
petition is not maintainable in this court. It is also stated that this
protest petition is filed with the malafide intention to harass the
family's members of Ansar and prayed for dismissal thereof.
8. I have heard the Ld. Counsels for the parties.
9. Sh. Pankaj Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the complainant
has submitted that in the case in hand, the FIR has been
registered on dated 24.03.2023 and thereafter, a complaint of
cruelty and demand of dowry was filed before the DCP, North-
East on dated 27.06.2023, wherein, number of incidents were
mentioned and submitted that copy of the said complaint is filed
with this protest petition, wherein, dated 03.08.2023 is
mentioned and submitted that since, the IO has failed to mention
the number of incidents in the charge-sheet, as, mentioned in the
protest petition, so, the Investigating Officer of the present case
may be directed to file additional charge-sheet against the
accused (1). Ansar S/o Israel, (2). Mohd. Israel S/o Achhan
Khan, (3). Mohd. Sazid S/o Israel, (4). Mrs. Nisaran W/o Mohd.
Israel, and (5). Shahesta D/o Mohd. Israel.
10. On the other hand, Sh. Sarfraj Asif, the Ld. Counsel
for the accused Ansar has submitted that in the case in hand, the
marriage of accused Ansar with the deceased Imrana was
solemnized on dated 27.06.2020 and submitted that earlier, sister
of deceased Imrana was also engaged with the brother of accused
Ansar namely Sajid. But, after engagement, Ashiya (who is sister
of this applicant Samir Malik) had refused to marry with Sajid,
so, the marriage of Ashiya was not solemnized with Sajid. But,
-- 4 of 8 --
5
marriage of the deceased Imrana was solemnized with Ansar and
submitted that after refusal of marriage by Ashiya, the family
members of the deceased did not agree for this marriage of
Imrana (since deceased) with Ansar. But, Imrana had told that
she would not break marriage and would marry with Ansar and
she had married with Ansar and her parents and her other
family's members stopped meeting with Imrana and her husband
Ansar and accused Ansar was living in the rented
accommodation with his wife Imrana and false allegations have
been levelled and submitted that during the investigating, it was
revealed that deceased Imrana was living with Ansar in rented
accommodation, so, charge-sheet has been filed only against
Ansar and his other family's members accused were kept in
column no. 12 of the charge-sheet and submitted that the present
protest petition is not maintainable nor this court can direct to the
IO to file the additional charge-sheet against the other family's
members of Ansar, who have been kept in column no. 12 of the
charge-sheet, as, no incriminating evidence has come on the
record against them and submitted that the applicant has filed a
copy of complaint dated 03.08.2023 alongwith this protest
petition, which is an afterthought version and no such complaint
to the DCP, North-East was filed on dated 03.08.2023 and
submitted that the present protest petition has been filed to harass
the accused Ansar and his other family's members and prayed for
dismissal of the said protest petition.
11. Sh. Praveen Kumar, Ld. substituted Addl. PP for the
-- 5 of 8 --
6
State has also submitted that the complaint dated 03.08.2023
appears to be afterthought and it is submitted that deceased
Imrana had expired on dated 24.03.2023 and FIR was registered
u/s. 304-B/498-A/34 of IPC on the statement of Sh. Allah Noor
Khan recorded by the Executed Magistrate on dated 24.03.2023
and this applicant/Samir Malik also signed on the said statement
of his father. The Ld. Counsel for the applicant Samir Malik has
submitted that that a complaint to the DCP was filed on dated
27.06.2023, but, copy of the complaint dated 03.08.2023 filed
and he has also submitted that the protest petition is not
maintainable in this court nor this court can direct to the IO to
file the additional charge-sheet against the other family's
members of Ansar, who have been kept in column no. 12 of the
charge-sheet, as, no incriminating evidence was found during the
investigation against them, as, the deceased Imrana was residing
with her husband Ansar separately from other accused (kept in
column no. 12 of the charge-sheet), after her marriage with him
that too in a rented accommodation.
12. I have given thoughtful consideration to the
submissions made by the Ld. Counsels for the parties and
perused the record.
13. The perusal of the record reveals that in the case in
hand, the FIR has been registered on the statement of father of
the deceased Imrana. The perusal of the record also reveals that
the marriage of the deceased Imrana with accused Ansar was
solemnized on dated 27.06.2020, but, in this protest petition, the
-- 6 of 8 --
7
date of marriage is mentioned, as, 27.06.2022. Ld. Counsel for
the applicant Samir Malik has submitted that the brother of the
deceased had filed a complaint before the DCP, North-East on
dated 27.06.2023 and number of incidents regarding cruelties
and demand of dowry were mentioned in the said complaint. He
has shown the photocopy of the complaint dated 03.08.2023.
Since, the Ld. Counsel for this applicant has argued that this
brother of the deceased had also filed the said complaint before
the DCP, North-East on dated 27.06.2023, but, he has shown the
complaint dated 03.08.2023. Since, it is mentioned in the charge-
sheet filed against Ansar that accused Ansar was living in rented
accommodation with the deceased Imrana i.e. separate from
other family's members, so, the charge-sheet has been filed only
against accused Ansar u/s. 304-B/498-A of IPC.
14. Since, the perusal of the record also reveals that the
FIR has been registered on the statement of father of the
deceased Imrana, wherein, he has suspected that accused Ansar,
father-in-law of deceased Mohd. Israel, mother-in-law of
deceased Smt. Nisaran, Nanad of deceased Shaista and three
Devars of deceased had committed murder of the deceased
Imrana and prayed for taking strict legal action against them. In
the case in hand, the report of FSL was received, which reveals
that no poisonous substance has been detected in the VISCERA
and from the opinion of the doctor, it is clear that cause of death
of the deceased is “ASPHYXIA AS A RESULT OF
ANTEMORTEM LIGATURE HANGING”. Since, on the basis
-- 7 of 8 --
8
of the investigation done by the IO, he has kept the other
suspects under column no. 12 and the charge-sheet has been filed
only against Ansar, so, in the considered opinion of this court, at
this stage, this court cannot direct to the IO to file the additional
charge-sheet against the persons, who are kept in column no. 12
of the charge-sheet, so, the protest petition filed by the applicant
is hereby dismissed, being not maintainable. Dasti copy of this
order be provided to the parties.
Announced in the open court
on 1st day of December, 2023.
(PAWAN KUMAR MATTO)
Addl. Sessions Judge (Special Judge NDPS)
North East District/Karkardooma Courts/Delhi
-- 8 of 8 --