* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1494/2008 & CRL. M.A. No.........of 2008 (to be numbered by the Re0stry) SAYEED MALIK & ORS. Petitioners Through: Mr.M. A. Rahman, Advocate. versus STATE OF DELHI Respondent • Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP. AND + AiAiL APPLN. 1646/2008 FARZANA & ORS Petitioners Through: Mr.M. A. Rahman, Advocate. versus STATE Respondent • Through: Mr. Pawan Behi, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR ORDER % 22.01.2009 1. These are applications seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 184 of 2008 under Sections 304-13, 323, 348, 506, 34 IPC registered at Police Ball App!. Nos. 1494 & 1646 of 2008 page 1 of 4 3 Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:22.07.2024 14:54 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified A Station Khajuri Khas. According to the status report submitted in this Court the deceased Sajida suffered 100% burn injuries on 26th May 2007. She made a dying declaration which was recorded by the Executive Magistrate on that day in which she did not blame any of her in-laws for the incident. She stated that she suffered burns when she was trying to light the kerosene stove to burn dung to ward of mosquitoes. Sajida died subsequently on 3 • June 2007. It appears that subsequently Nisha Parveen, the mother of the deceased, filed a complaint in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate ('ACMM') and pursuant to the direction issued by the ACMM under Section 156 (3) CrPC, the aforementioned FIR was registered on 21st June 2008. During investigation, the police have recorded the statement of a neighbour Taslima on 7th July 2008 which appears to support the mother's subsequent version that there was a quarrel that took • place between the husband Julfikar Malik and the deceased Sajida immediately prior to the incident of burning. 2. It is stated that the police has also received a complaint from the mother of the deceased that Julfikar and his brother Mehboob have been threatening her even as recently as two days ago. Bail App!. Nos. 1494 & 1646 01 2008 page 2 of 4 I In Bail Appi. No. 1646 of 2008, by interim orders dated 51h August 2008 and 7th November 2008 the arrests of the Petitioners were stayed but they were asked to cooperate in the investigation. In the said petition Julfikar is Petitioner No.4. In the considered view of this Court there is no case made out for grant of anticipatory bail to Julfikar at this stage. • Accordingly, in Bail Appin. No. 1646 of 2008 in respect of Petitioners ito 3 Farzana, Hafeez and Ayub respectively, it is directed that in the event of their arrest they shall be released on bail subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer ('JO'). Each of them will report to the JO as and when directed by the JO and fully cooperate in the investigation. The petition on behalf of Petitioner No.4 Julfikar is • hereby dismissed. As regards Bail Appl. No. 1494 of 2008, the Petitioners 1, 2 and 4 are elderly persons. They are the father, mother and uncle of Julfikar. Petitioner No.3 is the unmarried sister. It is directed that in the event of their arrest they shall be released on bail subject to their furnishing a personal BailAppi. Nos. 1494 & 1646 of 2008 page 3 of 4 bond in the sum of Rs.5,000I- each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer ('JO'). Each of them will report to the JO as and when directed by the JO and fully cooperate in the investigation. The bail applications are disposed of. It is reiterated that the • anticipatory bail of Julfikar is dismissed. The pending applications are also I disposed of. Dasti. JANUARY 22, 2009 dn S.MURALIDHAR, J Bail App!. Nos. 1494 & 1646 012008 page 4 of 4