Munna Khan v. The State Of Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi And ANR.

$~9 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 3456/2024 MUNNA KHAN .....Petitioner Through:

None.

versus THE STATE OF GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State.

Inspector Pankaj Gulliya (P.S. Dayalpur).

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 13.11.2024 1.

None appears for the petitioner.

2.

None had appeared for the petitioner on an earlier occasion as well, that is, on 08.10.2024.

3.

The petitioner seeks cancellation of bail granted to Respondent No.2, who is admitted on bail, by an order dated 18.04.2024, passed by the learned Trial Court in FIR No. 616/2023 dated 13.09.2023 for offences under Sections 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

4.

Respondent No.2 is the sister-in-law of the victim. The FIR was registered on receiving an information that one lady Shabana was admitted in hospital by her husband Danish. The victim was declared as brought dead.

5.

It was alleged that since victim died within seven years of marriage, inquiry was conducted by the SDM. It was claimed by the family of the victim that she was harassed and tortured by her The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 11:35:02

husband and other in-laws in regard to demand of dowry. Respondent No.2 was arrested along with other family members on 29.12.2023.

6.

The learned Trial Court noted that the only witness sighted to prove the incident of cruelty is Mohd. Abbas who has already been examined as PW1 and the other witnesses are the family members of the deceased and government officials. 7.

The learned Trial Court considered the tender age of Respondent No.2, who was 19 years of age at that stage and held that no useful purpose would be served by keeping her in judicial custody.

8.

The Investigating Officer is present in Court and on being asked informed that the Respondent No. 2 has not misused the liberty.

9.

Respondent No. 2 was arrested on 29.12.2023 and was admitted on bail by order dated 18.04.2024. Thus, considerable period of time had been spent by Respondent No. 2 in custody. 10.

The petitioner, even otherwise, does not seem to be interested in pursuing the present matter.

11.

The petition is, therefore, dismissed for non-prosecution. AMIT MAHAJAN, J NOVEMBER 13, 2024 'Aman'

"SS"

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 11:35:02