Rajan Sachdeva v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & Cors
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 412/2018 & Crl.M.A.2435/2018 (stay) RAJAN SACHDEVA .... Petitioner Represented by:
Mr.Pradeep Narula with Ms.Urmila Verma and Ms.Bhavna Khanna, Advocates versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS .... Respondents Represented by:
Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for the State with Ms.Jyoti Babbar, Advocate Insp.Sanjay Gowami, DIU/West and SI Jagpal Singh, Spl.Branch
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 14.05.2018 1.
By this petition the petitioner seeks appropriate directions for conducting a fresh investigation in FIR No.116/2013 under Sections 306/ 419/420/467/468/471/120B/34 IPC registered at PS Janakpuri. 2.
Petitioner is the brother of late Raman Sachdeva, who committed suicide at his residence A-2/211, second floor, Janakpuri, New Delhi by hanging himself to the ceiling fan of the drawing room on 15th October, 2012. It is the case of the petitioner that initially, when investigation was conducted, no suicide note was found by the police. However, on 20th
October, 2012, respondent No.3, wife of Raman Sachdeva, handed over a suicide note to the police allegedly found on 19th October, 012. In the said purported suicide note, the deceased had held five persons responsible for his death i.e. the petitioner, petitioner's wife Kavita, maternal Aunt Krishna Narula, brother-in-law Raj Kapoor and his wife Shashi Kapoor. 3.
On the basis of the written complaint of respondent No.3 and the suicide note, above noted FIR was registered and investigation was carried out against the petitioner, his wife Kavita and maternal aunt Krishna Narula. After completion of investigation a charge-sheet has since been filed against Rajan Sachdeva, Krishna Narula, Raj Kapoor, Shashi Kapoor and the name of Kavita Sachdeva has been kept in Column No.12. 4.
The main grievance of the petitioner is that the suicide note is a procured document, it is not in the handwriting of his brother and moreover, it has not been got compared from admitted handwriting of his brother but from the documents whose authenticity itself, to be in the handwriting of his brother, is doubtful.
5.
This Court vide order dated 25th April, 2018 directed the State to file a Status Report informing as to with what admitted handwriting of the deceased was the suicide note got compared. A report has been submitted. As per the report, the suicide note, i.e. questioned document Q1 which was on a piece of paper, was sent for comparison to FSL along with original blue colour diary containing 145 pages which were given by the wife of the deceased on 22nd October, 2012 and with specific emphasis on pages 25, 110, 130 and 141 which were also sent as questioned document Q3 to Q6. In addition to the blue diary, original sheet of a register having handwriting
in English and Hindi of the deceased on both sides of sheet as stated by Smt.Rajeshwari, was also sent for comparison. Besides the above, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State submits that the following documents which contained admitted signatures of the deceased were sent to the FSL :
(a) Original signature card of DENA Bank;
(b) 2 pages from original register of employee and remuneration of Ahuja Radios obtained from General Manager, Ahuja Radios; and (c) Original design change note (3 PPs) obtained from General Manager Ahuja Radios.
6.
Considering the fact that from the records of Dena Bank, original signature card and original register of employee and remuneration of Ahuja Radios and the original design change note obtained from Ahuja Radios and the opinion formed by the FSL on this count, this Court finds no ground to direct any further investigation in the matter. It would be the defence of the petitioner to show that the documents sent for comparison were not in the handwriting of his brother. Thus, this Court finds no ground to direct fresh investigation in the FIR No.116/2013.
7.
Petition and the application are dismissed.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MAY 14, 2018 'rk'