Mohd Anwar v. The State ( NCT Of Delhi)

$~7 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1694/2018 MOHD ANWAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr R.M.

Tufail, Mr Farooq Chaudhary and Mr Nahid Nasir, Advocates.

versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through:

Ms Purnima Malik, Advocate for Mr Avi Singh, ASC for R-1.

Inspector Y.K. Bhatia, DIU/Rohini.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 18.10.2019 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to respondent no. 1 to direct the transfer of the investigation of the present case to the Crime Branch or any other specialised agency. The petitioner has also prayed that the investigating agency be directed to locate respondent no. 6 (Seema Siddiqui) and direct her to join the investigation.

2.

The present petition was first listed on 28.05.2019. Subsequent orders passed by this Court indicate that this Court had issued specific directions with regards to certain aspects regarding the investigation. 3.

Since the petitioner had alleged foul play and had contended that the death of his son was unnatural; this Court had also directed the Director, PGIMER, Chandigarh to constitute a medical board of three doctors, including a forensic expert, to render an opinion on whether on the basis of

the documents on record, it could be opined that the deceased was smothered or that his death was unnatural. All documents were also directed to be presented before the Director, PGIMER, Chandigarh. 4.

status report has been filed, which briefly indicates the investigations carried out by the investigation agency. The wife of the deceased (respondent no.6) had also joined the investigation. She had also undergone a polygraph test.

5.

In view of the above, this Court is not persuaded to accept that the investigation of this case is required to be transferred to any other agency. Ms Malik, the learned counsel appearing for the State also submits, on instructions, that the final report would be submitted within a period of four weeks.

6.

It is clarified that all remedies and contentions of the petitioner in this regard are reserved.

7.

The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. VIBHU BAKHRU, J OCTOBER 18, 2019 RK