Govind Singh v. State

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + GOVIND SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Rajiv Bajaj, Advocate with Ms.

Sagarika Wadhwa, Advocate

Versus

STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel (Crl.) with Mr. Chaitanya Gosain, Advocate along with Insp. Pravin Kumar, DIU/Dwarka Distt.

CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL

O R D E R

% 02.02.2018

1. This habeas corpus petition is by the father of his 22 year old daughter, Ms. Komal, who appears to have gone missing from 20th March, 2016 onwards, 10 days after her marriage to one Ajay Singh.

2. Initially, this writ petition was disposed of on 23rd November, 2016 on the basis of the statement of the learned counsel for the State that the body of the girl had been recovered from the Kasna canal in U.P. However, the DNA of the mother of the missing girl did not match the DNA collected from the dead body found by the police.

3. This led the Court to revive the writ petition by an order dated 2nd August, 2017. The Court noted on 28th August 2017 that further investigation would

be carried out by DIU, South-West under the supervision of the Deputy Commissioner of Police.

4. Since that day, the State has been filing status reports. Meanwhile Ajay Singh, the husband of Komal, was arrested in FIR No. 345/2016 registered at P.S. Dwarka, Sector-23 under Section 302 IPC. On the basis of disclosures made by the accused i.e. Komal's husband, recoveries were effected. On further investigation, a charge sheet was filed in the said FIR. Arsing from the said FIR, Sessions Case No. 370/2017 is already registered and is pending in the Court of the learned Additional Judge-03, Dwarka (ASJ).

5. Today, Mr. Rahul Mehra, the learned Standing Counsel has handed over another status report by Mr. Pravin Kumar, Inspector, DIU, Dwarka dated 2nd February, 2018. While the status report mentions that the DNA analysis did not confirm that the body found was of the daughter of the Petitioner, the investigation team is stated to be still looking into other evidence regarding the circumstances in which the girl went missing and her possible killing thereafter. Mr. Mehra states that the State proposes to file a supplementary charge sheet in the pending criminal case which is at the stage of arguments on charge. It is seen that by order dated 25th May, 2017, the learned ASJ has granted bail to the accused subject to terms.

6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner made an earnest appeal that at this stage, the investigation should be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

7. With the criminal case in progress before the Court of the learned ASJ and at the stage of arguments on charge, and with the investigating agency contemplating filing a supplementary charge sheet, the Court is not inclined to accede to the above request.

8. In fact the Court sees no reason why the present petition should be kept pending. It is directed that the DIU will once in four weeks, convey to the Petitioner through the DCP the progress of the further investigation till the filing of the supplementary charge sheet in the pending criminal case.

9. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. S. MURALIDHAR, J.

VINOD GOEL, J.

FEBRUARY 02, 2018 'anb'