Crl.M.C.1602/2007 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1602/2007 ANAND PRAKASH @ HAZARI ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Hari Singh Devyada, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Saleem Ahmad, Additional Standing Counsel with SI Chandra Prakash, PS Crime Branch. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R % On 16th February, 2007 at about 8.08 P.M. an information was received in the police control room at Police Station Vasant Kunj regarding an accident near Shiv Murti Temple Flyover and that an injured was lying at the said place. ASI Dharampal and Constable Ganga Ram reached the place of incident but they found that neither the injured nor the complainant was present there. In the meanwhile, at 9.35 P.M. an information was received from Safdarjung Hospital at Police Station Vasant Kunj that one injured, namely, Jagmohan S/o Hazari Lal R/o Village Rangpuri, Delhi had been admitted by ASI Ranbir Singh, Incharge of PCR Van Zebra-51, after sustaining injuries in an accident. This information was sent to ASI Dharampal for necessary action. ASI Dharampal went to Safdarjung Hospital and made inquiries. The injured was unfit for statement. Thereafter, ASI Crl.M.C.1602/2007 Page 2 Dharampal made inquiries in Village Rangpuri, Mahipalpur but the address of the injured could not be located and then he returned to the place of incident. No eye witness could be found at the place of incident. ASI Dharampal returned back to the police station and DD entries were made. 2. On 18th February, 2007 at about 10.30 A.M., the petitioner, Mr. Hazari Lal met ASI Dharampal. The petitioner, Mr. Hazari Lal and ASI Dharampal visited Safdarjung Hospital and the petitioner identified the injured as his son Mr. Jagmohan, who was under treatment. On 18th February, 2007, the injured was found unfit for recording statement. A case under Section 279/337 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station, Vasant Kunj was registered. 3. On 19th February, 2007, injured Mr. Jagmohan expired in the hospital. Post mortem was conducted and thereafter dead body of Mr. Jagmohan was handed over to the petitioner for cremation. Accordingly, Section 337 of the Indian Penal Code was changed to Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code. 4 The petitioner in the present petition has made allegations that late Mr. Jagmohan had got married to Ms. Radha from Garhwal on 2nd December, 2001. According to him, the present case is not a case of a road traffic accident. The petitioner suspects involvement of his daughter-in-law i.e. Ms. Radha, her brother Manoj, mother of Ms. Radha, Ms. Saraswati and one Mr. Rana. It is alleged that Crl.M.C.1602/2007 Page 3 Mr. Rana has illicit relationship with Ms. Radha. It is also stated that there was no question Mr. Jagmohan going to Rajokri Flyover on 16th February, 2007, which is located far away and Mr. Jagmohan use to take a different route. It may be noted that Mr. Jagmohan and Ms. Radha have a minor daughter Anjali and the petitioner has asked for custody of the said minor daughter, which is contested by Ms. Radha. 5. In view of the allegations made and as it was alleged that the Investigating officer, Police Station Vasant Kunj had not conducted proper investigation, vide order dated 23rd July, 2009 it was directed that the matter be transferred to Crime Branch of Delhi Police for proper investigation. The Crime Branch of Delhi Police has filed two status reports dated 6th October, 2009 and 22nd February, 2010. In the status report dated 6th October, 2009, it is pointed out that one Mr. Ajay Sharma had informed the police control room about the accident on 16th February, 2007 at about 8 P.M. when he was coming from Gurgaon to Delhi via National Highway-8. He told the police that he had seen a person lying near Rajoukri Flyover. According to Mr. Ajay Sharma, this was a case of road traffic accident. The police also made inquiries from Ms. Radha. She in turn had made allegations against the petitioner that the petitioner herein and his wife threw her out from the house at Rangpuri Village. She has also stated that her father-in-law Crl.M.C.1602/2007 Page 4 Mr. Anand Prakash @ Hazari is making false allegations against her as he does not want to give any share in the property to her and her daughter. In the status report, it is stated that during investigation it has came to light that the deceased Mr. Jagmohan was living at Rangpuri Village and was working at a farm house at Samalkha, Delhi and the place of accident is enroute to his place of work. 6. In the second status report dated 22nd February, 2010, it is stated that polygraphic tests of Ms. Radha and her brother Mr. Manoj were conducted on 18th and 19th November, 2009, respectively and as per the report received, both persons were found to be truthful and as per analysis of Polygraphs, they were not involved in the death of Mr. Jagmohan. 7. In view of the aforesaid position, it is apparent that the respondent-State has conducted investigation, but till date they have not come across any evidence or material to substantiate the allegations made by the petitioner. The crime branch will process and complete investigation in accordance with law. In these circumstances, no further order or direction is required to be passed in the present writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of. SANJIV KHANNA, J. MAY 11, 2010 NA/J