Deepak Katara vs State ( Govt Of Nct Of Delhi)
- Court
- Delhi High Court
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 14.10.2026
Date of Decision: 28.10.2026
Uploaded on: 28.10.2026
# CNR No. DLHC010765612016
+ CRL.A. 237/2016
DEEPAK KATARA .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Chetan Lokur, Adv
versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the
State.
SI, Nitesh Yadav, PS Meharauli
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
JUDGMENT
MADHU JAIN, J.
1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 374 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “ Cr. P.C. ”) assailing
the Judgment dated 28.01.2016 and the order on sentence dated 29.01.2016
passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Saket, New Delhi, in FIR No.
230/2012, registered at P.S. Mehrauli under Sections 302, 306, and 498A of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860; whereby the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge
was pleased to sentence the Appellant to undergo seven (7) Years SI along
with a fine of Rs.3,00,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 306,
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 1 of 45
IPC, and to undergo three (3) Years SI along with a fine of Rs.50,000/-
under Section 498-A, IPC.
The brief facts of the case, as emerging from the impugned order, are as
follows:
2. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 25.05.2012, information
vide DD No. 27-A was received at PS Mehrauli at about 4.05 pm from one
Hemant Gautam (PW-25) from Kota, Rajasthan that his sister-in-law namely
Vinita Katara, w/o. Deepak Katara, r/o. Deluxe Apartment, Ward No. 6,
Mehrauli, New Delhi, called him half an hour before and informed that she
is committing suicide and thereafter, her phone is not reachable. Hemant
Gautam requested police official posted at PS Mehrauli to check the
aforesaid apartment by sending police. Pursuant to the request of Hemant
Gautam, HC Devender and HC Subhash were rushed to the spot and on
reaching there, HC Subhash informed SI Surinder Pal Singh (PW-38) on his
mobile phone that door of the house of Vineeta at IInd floor, Deluxe
Apartment ward no. 6 is locked from inside and there is no response from
inside. Thereafter, SI Surinder Pal Singh (PW-38) reached the spot along
with ASI Ravi Shankar. While SI Surinder Pal Singh was proceeding to the
spot, Duty Officer HC Jagvir (PW-12) also handed over a complaint to SI
Surinder Pal Singh (PW-38) telling that one lady Vineeta Katara, w/o.
Deepak Katara had come to Police Station and has given this complaint
against her husband and in-laws. SI Surinder Pal Singh (PW-38) reached the
spot and broke open the door of the flat in the said apartment in the presence
of PW Sat Prakash and Chowkidar namely Bhagirath and found that inside
one room of the said flat, one lady was hanging with ceiling fan with the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 2 of 45
help of chunni and was dead. In the other room of the flat, one girl aged
about 3 ½ - 4 years was hanging with ceiling fan with the support of chunni
and one boy aged about 2 years was lying naked dead on the double bed
with ligature marks on the neck. SI Surinder Pal Singh immediately
informed the Police Station and Inspector Dalip with SHO Inspector Pankaj
Singh and other staff reached the spot. From the conversation with relatives
of deceased, it was revealed that deceased was married to Deepak Katara
five years ago. Accordingly, SDM, Hauz Khas was informed regarding
death of Vineeta Katara who also arrived at the spot and inquest proceedings
of deceased Vineeta Katara was conducted by him.
3. Deepak Katara, husband of deceased Vineeta Katara who was on duty
at AIIMS, was also called at the spot and he identified the deceased as his
wife Vineeta Katara, daughter Harshita and son Harshit. On the basis of
circumstances, it was revealed that both the children were killed by lady
Vineeta Katara and thereafter, she committed suicide by hanging. The house
was completely locked from inside. On the basis of circumstances, dead
bodies and gist of the complaint given by deceased in PS Mehrauli just
before the incident, FIR u/s. 302/306/498-A IPC was registered at PS
Mehrauli. After registration of FIR, investigation was handed over to
Inspector Dalip. Crime team and photographer had also been called at the
spot. Crime Team inspected the scene of crime and took photographs.
Inspector Dalip inspected the scene of crime, prepared the site plan along
with SI Surinder Pal Singh. Inspector Dalip conducted the inquest
proceedings of deceased Harshit aged about 2 years and Harshita aged 3 ½ -
4 years. After inquest proceedings were completed by SDM, Hauz Khas,
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 3 of 45
Inspector Dalip, dead body of deceased Vineeta Katara was inspected by
SDM, Hauz Khas and all the three dead bodies were sent to mortuary,
AIIMS. Thereafter, Inspector Dalip lifted exhibits from the spot such as
plastic chair, ligature materials (chunni’s), one wooden stool, broken pieces
of iron grill of main gate and the broken kundi and seized them by preparing
the seizure memo.
4. Carbon copy of complaint and bunch of keys which were handed over
to one boy namely Manoj (PW-26) by Vineeta Katara who in turn had
handed over the same to building chowkidar Bhagirath (PW-11) were also
seized and taken into possession. Accused Deepak Katara was interrogated.
5. On 26.05.2012, mother of deceased and father of deceased arrived at
Police Station along with their relatives from Rawat Bhata in Chitorgarh,
Rajasthan. During inquest proceedings of Vineeta Katara, SDM, Hauz Khas
recorded the statement of Smt. Meera Sharma (mother of deceased/PW-7)
and Krishan Hari Sharma (father of deceased/PW-19) and postmortem of all
dead bodies were conducted in AIIMS mortuary. The dead bodies were
handed over to the relative after postmortem. After inquest proceedings
conducted by SDM, Hauz Khas, section 304-B IPC was added in the case.
Accused Deepak Katara was arrested and interrogated. Accused Deepak
Katara admitted to the demand of dowry and torture of deceased at his
hands. Accused Deepak Katara further disclosed that when he had quarrel
with deceased Vineeta Katara in the morning of 25.05.2012, he had broken
and thrown one SIM and kept the mobile phone with him so that Vineeta
Katara cannot call to her parents.
6. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 4 of 45
accused Deepak Katara and Harpati for offences punishable under Sections
304-B, 306 and 498-A IPC. Third accused namely Kedar Nath could not be
arrested and he was declared proclaimed offender. After committal
proceedings, charge u/s. 498-A/304-B/306 IPC were framed against accused
Deepak Katara and Harpati. Both the accused pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial.
7. To prove its case against the accused persons and discharge its
burden, the prosecution examined thirty-eight witnesses before the learned
Trial Court, whose testimonies have been discussed in the impugned
judgment as under:
“12. PW-2 HC Devender Kumar, PW-6 Deepa,
PW-7 Meera Sharma (mother of deceased), PW-11
Bhagirath (chowkidar), PW-19 Krishan Hari
Sharma, (father of deceased), PW-21 Intkhab, PW-
22 Heera Lal (neighbour and friend of father of
deceased), PW-25 Hemant (brother-in-law of
deceased), PW-26 Manoj, PW-28 Sangeeta
(childhood friend of deceased), PW-37 Inspector
Dalip (Investigating Officer) and PW-38 SI S.P.
Singh, are material witnesses in this case.
13. PW-2 HC Devender Kumar submitted that on
25.05.2012, at about 4 pm, he and HC Subhash
(PW-17) were called by the Duty Officer HC Jaivir
(PW-12) in his reporting room and were told that
one Hemant had informed through telephone that
his sister-in-law namely Vineeta Katara, w/o.
Deepak Katara, who lives in 3-C, Deluxe
Apartment, Ward No.6, Mehrauli, New Delhi, is
committing suicide, PW-2 HC Devender Kumar
was further told by PW-12 HC Jaivir that he
received this information from Rajasthan about
half an hour before and presently Vineeta Katara
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 5 of 45
is not picking up the phone. PW-2 HC Devender
Kumar further deposed that on this information, he
along with HC Subhash (PW-17) reached 3-C
within 10-15 minutes where they found that room
was locked from inside, PW-2 HC Devender
Kumar informed the Division Officer SI S.P. Singh
(PW-38) about the situation on his phone, SI S.P.
Singh alongwith ASI Ravi Shankar reached the
spot within 10-15 minutes and they also tried to
open the door but the door could not be opened. SI
S.P. Singh (PW-38) peeped through the ventilator
and saw that one lady was hanging with ceiling
fan, in the meanwhile, Chowkidar (PW-11
Bhagirath) came there and he handed over one
letter and bunch of keys to SI S.P. Singh. However,
despite using those keys, door could not be opened.
SI S.P. Singh (PW-38) called one person namely
Sat Prakash for breaking open the lock and he
broke open the door. PW-2 Devender Kumar
further deposed that after opening the door, they
saw that a lady was hanging from ceiling fan with
chunni around her neck, in the first room of the
house/entry room and the feet of the lady were
touching the bed, one wooden stool was also lying
on the bed and one plastic chair was also lying by
the side of the bed on the floor. PW-2 HC
Devender Kumar further deposed that in another
room, one male child aged about 2 years was lying
on the bed, above the bed, one female child aged
about 4 years was hanging by neck from the ceiling
fan with a chunni and both the children were dead.
The Chowkidar (PW-11 Bhagirath) told that name
of the lady was Vineeta Katara, w/o. Deepak
Katara. PW-2 Devender Kumar further deposed
that SI S.P. Singh (PW-38) briefed the senior
officers about the situation. PW-2 Devender
Kumar was asked by SI S.P. Singh (PW-38) to
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 6 of 45
bring accused Deepak Katara from AIIMS where
he was employed, PW-2 went to the Screening
Department of AIIMS hospital and met Deepak
Katara there. PW-2 Devender Kumar brought
Deepak Katara to his house and thereafter SI S.P.
Singh (PW-38) handed over the ruqqa to PW-2 for
getting the FIR registered and PW-2 came to
Police Station and got the case registered.
14. PW-38 SI S.P. Singh conducted
inquiry/proceedings before registration of FIR,
prepared the ruqqa and got the FIR registered.
PW-38 SI S.P. Singh was informed of the situation
at the spot by HC Subhash and thereafter, he
reached Deluxe Apartment, Ward no. 6, Mehrauli
and found that door of the flat was bolted from
inside and no-one was responding. PW-38 SI S.P.
Singh further deposed that after receiving call from
HC Subhash, he along with ASI Ravi Shankar went
inside the reporting room of Police Station where
Duty Officer HC Jaivir informed him that one lady
namely Vineeta Katara who lived in Deluxe
Apartment, Ward no. 6, Mehrauli had given a
written complaint against her husband and in-laws
and the said complaint was handed over to PW-38
for investigation. PW-38 SI S.P. Singh further
deposed that thereafter, he along with ASI Ravi
Shankar reached the spot after making departure
entry vide DD no. 31-A and HC Subhash met them
at the spot. PW-38 SI S.P. Singh reached the
second floor and saw that door of the room was
bolted from inside so PW-38 peeped through the
glass which was above the door of the house and
saw that a lady was hanging from ceiling fan with
a chunni. PW-38 SI S.P. Singh called one Satya
Prakash through one other police official, who
lives near the house of deceased and accused,
Satya Prakash broke the door of the house and
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 7 of 45
police officials entered the first room and found
that a lady was hanging from ceiling fan with the
help of chunni, one wooden stool was also lying on
the bed and on the floor one plastic chair was lying
near the bed. PW-38 SI S.P. Singh further deposed
that thereafter, they went inside another room
where they found one male child aged about 1 ½ -
2 years was lying on the bed and there were marks
of strangulation around the neck of the child and
one girl child aged 3-4 years was found hanging
from ceiling fan with the help of chunni. On
inquiry, PW-38 SI S.P. Singh came to know that the
name of deceased was Vineeta Katara, name of
male child was Harshit and name of girl child was
Harshita. PW-38 SI S.P. Singh informed about the
incident to Inspector Pankaj Singh, SHO and SDM,
Hauz Khas as PW-38 SI S.P. Singh came to know
that marriage of deceased Vineeta Katara with
accused Deepak Katara was solemnized 4-5 years
back. Thereafter, SHO PS Mehrauli Inspector
Pankaj Singh, Inspector Dalip, SI Pushpinder, Ct.
Satpal, Ct. Ajay and other staff reached the spot.
PW-38 SI S.P. Singh also called the husband of
deceased namely Deepak Katara through
Constable from AIIMS Hospital. On the basis of
scene of crime, PW-38 SI S.P. Singh prepared
rukka Ex. PW-38/A and handed over the same to
HC Devender for registration of FIR and after
registration of FIR, investigation was conducted by
Inspector Dalip.
15. PW-37 Inspector Dalip Kumar inter alia
deposed that after registration of FIR,
investigation was handed over to him and he
conducted inquest proceedings with respect of
dead body of Harisht and Harshita and filled form
no. 25:35 (1) (B) Ex. PW-37/A and Ex. PW-37/B,
PW-37 Inspector Dalip Kumar recorded
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 8 of 45
identification statement of Deepak Katara as Ex.
PW-37/C which bears the signature of accused
Deepak Katara at point ‘A’. PW-37 Inspector
Dalip Kumar also recorded the identification
statement of Bhagirath Ex. PW-11/B. PW-37
Inspector Dalip Kumar further deposed that after
conducting inquest proceedings, SDM, Hauz Khas
reached the spot and both the dead bodies were
brought down after cutting chunni’s and all the
three dead bodies were sent to AIIMS mortuary.
PW-37 Inspector Dalip Kumar seized the plastic
chair, wooden chair vide seizure memo Ex. PW-
17/A and Ex. PW-17/B. PW-37 Inspector Dalip
Kumar prepared the site plan Ex. PW-37/D. PW-
37 Inspector Dalip Kumar also seized ligature
material vide seizure memo Ex. PW-17/C and Ex.
PW-17/D. PW-37 Inspector Dalip Kumar further
deposed that SI S.P. Singh also handed over
original complaint along with carbon copy and one
bunch of keys to him at that time SI S.P. Singh
(PW-38) told that he received the original
complaint from Police Station Mehrauli. PW-37
Inspector Dalip Kumar seized the original
complaint along with its copy and bunch of keys
vide memo Ex. PW-17/A. PW-37 Inspector Dalip
Kumar further deposed that on 26.05.2012, father
of deceased namely Krishan Hari Sharma, mother
of deceased Meera Sharma, brother of deceased
Ashish Sharma, brother-in-law Hemant Gautam
along with other relatives arrived in Police Station
and PW-37 Inspector Dalip Kumar informed the
SDM and on whose advice, parents and relatives of
deceased were taken to AIIMS mortuary. PW-37
Inspector Dalip Kumar moved two applications
requesting the Head, Department of Forensic
Medicine, AIIMS to conduct postmortem on the
dead body of children Harisht and Harshita. SDM
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 9 of 45
recorded the statements of father of deceased
(Krishan Hari Sharma) and mother of deceased
(Meera Sharma) and handed over the inquiry
report to PW-37. After postmortem, all the dead
bodies were handed over to the father of deceased.
PW-37 Inspector Dalip Kumar further deposed
that on the direction of senior officials as well as
inquiry report of SDM, he added section 304-B
IPC in the case and further interrogated accused
Deepak Katara and arrested him vide memo Ex.
PW-37/J. PW-37 Inspector Dalip Kumar further
deposed that on 13.07.2012, he along with SI S.P.
Singh and Ct. Sher Singh proceeded to the parental
house of deceased Vineeta Katara at Rawat Bhata,
District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan where on
14.07.2012, Krishan Hari father of deceased
produced three photographs showing the marriage
of deceased Vineeta Katara with accused Deepak
Katara, one DVD of marriage function and four
jewelery receipts and same were seized by PW-37.
PW-37 Inspector Dalip Kumar also recorded the
statement of public witnesses namely Heera Lal
and one Deepa who was residing on the first floor
of Deluxe Apartment, Ward No. 6, Mehrauli. PW-
37 Inspector Dalip Kumar further deposed that
during investigation, he also came to know that
actual number of flat where the incident has
happened was flat no. 4, second floor, Ward no. 6,
Mehrauli whereas deceased Vineeta Katara had
mentioned flat number as flat no. 3-C in her
complaint which she had filed in Police Station on
the day of incident just before her death. PW-37
Inspector Dalip Kumar further deposed that he
also collected photocopy of documents of flat from
Harish Kumar Jain who had sold this flat to
deceased Vineeta Katara and also recorded the
statement of Harish Kumar Jain in this regard.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 10 of 45
16. PW-29 Mr. Rajeev Shukla, who was working as
SDM, Hauz Khas on the date of incident, deposed
that he received information at about 5.30 pm from
SHO PS Mehrauli that a lady had committed
suicide at her Deluxe home apartment at Mehrauli.
Thereafter, PW-29 Mr. Rajeev Shukla, reached the
spot and found that a lady whose name was later
on revealed as Vineeta Katara was hanging with
chunni from a ceiling fan. In the adjacent room,
her son was lying dead on the bed and her
daughter was also hanging from the ceiling fan.
PW-29 Mr. Rajeev Shukla further deposed that he
filled up form no.25:35(1B) Ex. PW-29/A. PW-29
Mr. Rajeev Shukla further deposed that on the next
day, he went to AIIMS mortuary and met the
parents of deceased namely Meera Sharma and
Krishan Hari Sharma and recorded their
statements and made a request to Autopsy Surgeon
Ex. PW-29/B for conducting postmortem on the
body of deceased Vineeta Katara. PW-29 Mr.
Rajeev Shukla further deposed that he prepared
inquest report Ex. PW-29/D and directed SHO to
take appropriate action as per law.
17. When the deposition of PW-7 Meera Sharma
and PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma are carefully
perused and analyzed, one does not find any
specific allegation that accused Harpati subjected
the deceased to cruelty or demanded dowry from
her. PW-7 Meera Sharma deposed that when
demand of accused Deepak for Rs. 50,000/- was
not met, accused Deepak continued to harass the
deceased and his parents also joined him in
harassing the deceased. PW-7 Meera Sharma
further deposed that Deepak Katara used to tell the
deceased that PW-7 Meera Sharma and PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma have not given enough
dowry and since Deepak Katara is now employed
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 11 of 45
with AIIMS, he would get Rs. 30 lacs as dowry. It
is, therefore, obvious that specific details of cruel
treatment towards deceased at the hands of
accused Harpati particularly on account of
demand of dowry are lacking in the deposition of
PW-7 Meera Sharma and PW-19 Krishan Hari
Sharma. In Salamat Ali Vs. State of Bihar - AIR
1995 Supreme Court Cases 1983 it was held that in
the absence of clear and pointed evidence it would
be unsafe to maintain conviction of parents, on
vague allegations that demand of dowry was made
by husband’s family members.
18. At another place, PW-7 Meera Sharma
deposed that deceased telephoned her from Kota
and told her that she is not given food. Here again,
PW-7 Meera Sharma did not specify as to who
deprived the deceased of food in her in-laws house.
PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma deposed that about 1
½ months prior to the death of deceased, accused
persons demanded Rs. 50,000/-. However, PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma has not specified as to which
of the accused demanded Rs. 50,000/- from
deceased or from PW-7 Meera Sharma or PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma himself. In-fact, PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma while giving his deposition
in the Court improved over his version given to the
SDM as PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma has nowhere
stated in his statement Ex. PW-19/A recorded by
the SDM that about 1-1 ½ months prior to the
death of deceased, accused persons also demanded
Rs. 50,000/-. Similarly, PW-19 Krishan Hari
Sharma also made improvement over his version
contained in his statement Ex. PW-19/A recorded
by SDM that PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma deposed
as to how his wife dropped the deceased at the
house of accused persons on 21.05.2012. PW-19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 12 of 45
Krishan Hari Sharma further deposed that one day
prior to the death of deceased, he made call to his
daughter as he wanted to talk to his daughter’s
children but the phone was picked up by accused
Deepak Katara and accused Deepak Katara told
“tumhari ladki deidh mahine tumhara yahan rahi,
tumne usko koi lakshan nahi sikhaye” (your
daughter lived with you for 1 ½ months, you have
not taught her manners). According to PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma, when PW-19 asked accused
Deepak Katara to make him talk to his daughter
and he talked with his daughter and asked her to
adjust herself, at that time, PW-19 over heard the
voice of accused Deepak Katara on phone and he
was abusing his daughter and was saying that she
had not cleaned the utensils of her mother and he
will kill her. PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma further
deposed that on the next day i.e. Friday, wife of
PW-19 received a telephonic call of his daughter
on her mobile phone no. 8432581164 at about 11-
11.30 am and deceased told that she has given the
key of Godrej almirah in the house at Kota to
Deepa and in that almirah, her daughter had kept
all her jewelery articles and she is going to die as
her husband had severally beaten her in the night.
PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma further deposed that
after
19. PW-28 Sangeeta who is the childhood friend of
deceased has also not mentioned about any cruel
treatment of deceased at the hands of accused
Harpati on account of dowry or otherwise.
Regarding accused Harpati, PW-28 Sangeeta
merely deposed that deceased told her that
behaviour of her father-in-law and mother-in-law
is not supportive as they used to taunt her. This is
not sufficient to prove the charge u/s. 498-A IPC,
u/s. 304-B IPC and u/s. 306 IPC.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 13 of 45
20. PW-22 Heera Lal who is the brother and friend
of father of deceased has deposed about Rs. 2 lacs
demanded by accused for purchasing a flat and
same were given to accused Deepak Katara. PW-
22 Heera Lal has nowhere deposed that accused
Harpati tortured or harassed the deceased on
account of dowry or otherwise. As in the
depositions of PW-7 Meera Sharma, PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma, PW-28 Sangeeta, the main
thrust of the deposition of PW-22 Heera Lal is on
the dowry demand being raised by accused
Deepak. It is, therefore, obvious that prosecution
miserably failed to prove that accused Harpati
being the mother-in-law of deccased subjected her
to cruelty. Prosecution has also failed to prove that
accused Harpati by her conducted has instigated
the deceased to commit suicide.
…
25. So far as accused Deepak Katara is concerned,
PW-7 Meera Sharma, mother of deceased has
deposed that her daughter Vineeta was married on
20.05.2007 with accused Deepak at Rawat Bhata
and at the time of marriage, Deepak Katara was in
a private job at Dehradun and was earning Rs.
5,000/- per month. After six months of his
marriage, Deepak Katara got a job at AIIMS and
after his employment at AIIMS, his demands
increased and he started beating the deceased and
demanded Rs.2 lacs from the parents of deceased.
PW-7 Meera Sharma further deposed that her
husband himself came and gave Rs. 2 lacs for the
purchase of flat. It has also come in the deposition
of PW-7 Meera Sharma that even at the time of
marriage of her younger brother Kavita, deceased
came to attend the marriage but accused Deepak
Katara himself did not come and had demanded a
sum of Rs. 50,000/-and on account of refusal of
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 14 of 45
parents of deceased to pay Rs. 50,000/- to accused
Deepak Katara, accused Deepak Katara did not
attend the marriage of Kavita. PW-7 Meera
Sharma further deposed that accused continued to
beat the deceased and kept on demanding money.
PW-7 Meera Sharma has further deposed that in
October 2011, deceased Vineeta had gone to
Police Station to make complainant against
Deepak Katara and his family when she was turned
out of his house by accused Deepak Katara and
police got the matter sorted out by counselling
Deepak Katara. PW-7 Meera Sharma went on to
depose that Deepak Katara again gave beating to
deceased after reaching home. PW-7 Meera
Sharma further deposed that her son Ankit went to
Kota and brought the deceased to their house at
Rawat Bhata on 17.04.2012 and her daughter lived
with her for one month and four days, accused
Deepak reached Kota and from there, he
telephoned and called Vineeta at Kota as he had to
go to Delhi and he also demanded Rs. 50,000/-,
Vineeta refused to bring any money, PW-7 Meera
Sharma asked the deceased to call Deepak Katara
to their house at Rawat Bhata, Rajasthan, saying
that PW-7 will pay him Rs. 50,000/-, accused
Deepak Katara did not come to the house of PW-7
and accordingly PW-7 Meera Sharma did not pay
any money to him. PW-7 Meera Sharma further
deposed that on the insistence of accused Deepak
Katara, she dropped the deceased at her
matrimonial home at Kota and on 01.05.2012,
deceased and accused Deepak Katara left for Kota
in the night of 23.05.2012. PW-7 Meera Sharma
further deposed that her daughter telephoned her
on 24.05.2012 and informed that she was beaten
on that night and she was not even given food and
she was hungry since then. Thereafter, PW-7
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 15 of 45
Meera Sharma talked with accused Deepak Katara
on phone and accused Deepak Katara stated that
he would kill Vineeta as she has been tutored by
her parents. PW-7 Meera Sharma further deposed
that on 25.05.2012 at about 11.30-12 noon,
Vineeta telephoned her from a PCO as her mobile
phone was damaged by accused Deepak Katara
and told that she has been turned out of the house
by Deepak and her father-in-law is telling her to
kill her and they will see the consequence. PW-7
Meera Sharma tried to contact the deceased on her
mobile phone but she could not contact her.
Thereafter, PW-7 Meera Sharma, tried to contact
other relatives of accused Deepak Katara to
counsel him but to no avail. At about 5-5.30 pm,
PW-7 Meera Sharma received a telephonic call
from Lokinder, elder brother of Deepak Katara,
informing that deceased has committed suicide.
PW-7 Meera Sharma further deposed that
immediately thereafter, she along with her
husband, her son Ashish Sharma and son-in-law
Hemant left for Delhi and where SDM recorded
her statement Ex. PW-7/A.
26. PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma, father of
deceased, also deposed about the marriage of
deceased with accused Deepak Katara in the year
2007 and the fact that accused Deepak Katara at
the time of marriage was doing a private job and
after the marriage, he got a job at AIIMS and
demanded Rs. 2 lacs from deceased. PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma further deposed that he paid
Rs. 2 lacs to one Jain from whom flat was
purchased in the name of Deepak Katara and his
father Kedar Nath. PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma
specifically deposed that deceased was harassed
after Deepak Katara got a job in AIIMS Hospital.
PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma further deposed that
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 16 of 45
1-1 ½ month prior to the death of deceased,
accused persons demanded Rs. 50,000/- but he
refused to give the same. PW-19 Krishan Hari
Sharma then deposed as to how his wife dropped
the deceased at the house of accused persons on
21.05.2012. PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma further
deposed that one day prior to the death of his
daughter, he made call to his daughter as he
wanted to talk to his daughter’s children but the
phone was picked up by accused Deepak Katara
and accused Deepak Katara told “tumhari ladki
deidh mahine tumhara yahan rahi, tumne usko koi
lakshan nahi sikhaye” (your daughter lived with
you for 1 ½ months, you have not taught her
manners). According to PW-19 Krishan Hari
Sharma, when PW-19 asked accused Deepak
Katara to make him talk to his daughter and he
talked with his daughter and asked her to adjust
herself, at that time, PW-19 overheard the voice of
accused Deepak Katara on phone and he was
abusing his daughter and was saying that she had
not cleaned the utensils of her mother and he will
kill her. PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma further
deposed that on the next day i.e. Friday, wife of
PW-19 received a telephonic call of his daughter
on her mobile phone no. 8432581164 at about 11-
11.30 am and deceased told that she has given the
key of Godrej almirah in the house at Kota to
Deepa and in that almirah, her daughter had kept
all her jewelery articles and she is going to die as
her husband had severally beaten her in the night.
PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma further deposed that
after hearing the said call, they became perplexed
and made call to the relatives of accused persons
but that call could not be connected. Thereafter,
PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma informed his son-in-
law Hemant and informed about the conversation
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 17 of 45
which PW-19 had with his daughter and Hemant,
after obtaining telephone number of Police Station
Mehrauli from internet informed PS Mehrauli.
PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma further deposed that
at about 5.30 pm, his wife received a telephonic
call from the elder brother of accused Deepak
Katara that deceased has committed suicide. PW-
19 Krishan Hari Sharma further deposed that on
the next day he along with his wife, his another
daughter, son, his brother and other relatives came
to Delhi where SDM recorded his statement Ex.
PW-19/A.
27. It is evident from the depositions of PW-7
Meera Sharma and PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma
that accused Deepak Katara started harassing the
deceased and treated her with cruelty even since,
he got a job at AIIMS. It can be seen from the
depositions of PW-7 Meera Sharma and PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma that accused Deepak Katara
first demanded Rs. 2 lacs for purchasing flat at
Delhi and that demand was fulfilled by PW-19
Krishan Hari Sharma in the presence of PW-22
Heera Lal. However, greed of accused Deepak
Katara was not satisfied and he kept on demanding
money from deceased and her parents. Accused
Deepak Katara refused to attend the marriage of
younger sister of deceased as his demand of Rs.
50,000/- was not fulfilled by the parents of
deceased. This fact has been corroborated by an
independent witness i.e PW-28 Sangeeta. PW-28
Sangeeta has also deposed that deceased told her
that when marriage of deceased was solemnized
with accused Deepak Katara, he was doing a
private job and after marriage, he has got a job at
AIIMS and his demands were raised. Not attending
the marriage of younger sister of deceased on
account of non-fulfillment of his demand of Rs.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 18 of 45
50,000/- was the cruel conduct of accused Deepak
Katara towards the deceased as deceased has to
explain to all the relatives present in the marriage
as to why her husband has not attended the
marriage.
28. PW-22 Heera Lal has deposed that Rs. 2 lacs
were demanded by accused from PW-19 Krishan
Hari Sharma in his presence for purchasing a flat
and same were given to him. PW-22 Heera Lal
further deposed that even on that occasion, quarrel
had taken place between accused and Vineeta. The
fact that accused Deepak Katara being the
husband of deceased subjected the deceased to
cruelty is proved not only by the depositions of
PW-7 Meera Sharma and PW-19 Krishan Hari
Sharma but also by independent witnesses namely
PW-22 Heera Lal and PW-28 Sangeeta.
Testimonies of PW-22 Heera Lal and PW-28
Sangeeta could not be shaken during cross
examination and can be safely relied upon. While
cross examining PW-22 Heera Lal and PW-28
Sangeeta, the main focus of learned defence
counsel was to prove that these witnesses are not
aware of the background of father of deceased i.e.
PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma. Even if, it is
accepted that these witnesses were ignorant of
criminal background of the father of deceased,
same will not make them unreliable witnesses.
…
…
47. PW-1 Dr. Rajesh, Junior Resident, Department
of Forensic Medicine, AIIMS, New Delhi, who
conducted postmortem on the body of deceased
Vineeta Katara opined that cause of death in this
case was asphyxia due to antemortem hanging.
PW-1 Dr. Rajesh also gave subsequent opinion to
the effect that ligature mark over the neck as
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 19 of 45
described in the postmortem report could have
been caused by the alleged ligature material
submitted to him. Similarly, PW-27 Dr.
Raghvender Kumar, Assistant Professor, AIIMS,
who conducted postmortem on the body of Harshit
Katara opined that cause of death was asphyxia
due to antemortem hanging by ligature. PW-27 Dr.
Raghvender Kumar also identified the signature
and handwriting of Dr. Sudipta Rangan Singh who
had given subsequent opinion to the effect that
ligature mark over the neck as described in the
postmortem report could have been caused by any
of the alleged ligature material submitted to him
opinion.
48. PW-3 Dr. Asit Kumar Sikary, Sr.Resident,
Department of Forensic Medicine AIIMS, New
Delhi who conducted postmortem on the body of
Harshita opined that cause of death was asphyxia
due to antemortem hanging by ligature. PW-3 Dr.
Asit Kumar Sikary also gave subsequent opinion
on the postmortem to the effect that ligature mark
over the neck could have been caused by any of the
two ligature materials submitted to him.… ”
8. On the completion of prosecution evidence, an examination of
accused person u/s 313 Cr. P.C was conducted on 18.09.2015, during his
examination, he denied all the allegations levelled against them and claimed
his innocence by stating that he has been falsely implicated in this case, that
the deceased was a short tempered lady, and that the deceased was instigated
by her own parents to commit suicide. The discussion regarding the defence
witnesses by the learned Trial Court is reproduced hereinbelow:
“6. … accused Deepak putforth the defence that
few months before her death, the suitcase of
deceased had fallen on the ground whereupon her
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 20 of 45
educational certificates had fallen on the floor and
on seeing them, he came to know that father’s
name of deceased as Ashok Pathak and her
mother’s name is Meera Pathak and her own name
is Vineeta Pathak and they belong to Gwalior,
Madhya Pradesh. Accused Deepak Katara further
stated that he made inquiries from Madhya
Prakash and came to know that the father of
deceased had committed a murder there at Madhya
Pradesh and had run away from there and had
been declared proclaimed offender by Hon’ble
Court and they had been residing at Rawat Bhata,
Rajasthan. Accused further stated that this fact was
concealed from him and his parents at the time of
marriage and accused asked the deceased about it
and thereafter, deceased went to her parents and
she remained in her parental house for about 1
months and four days and asked her father about it
who admitted the said fact and on being asked by
the deceased as to how she could show her face to
her husband and other family members, father of
deceased told her do not show your face if you do
not want to show. In other words, accused took the
defence that deceased was instigated by her
parents to commit suicide.
…
39. During examination of accused Deepak Katara
u/s. 313 Cr.PC, it was put to accused that PW-12
HC Jaivir Singh received a complaint from Vineeta
Katara Ex. PW-12/B vide DD No. 39-B and after
receiving the same, PW-12 HC Jaivir Singh
handed over the same to the Reader of SHO.
Accused never Katara merely stated that “it is
incorrect”. Accused now raised a plea that some
person other than the deceased gave the complaint
Ex. PW-12/B to the Duty Officer of PS Mehrauli
impersonating as deceased Vineeta Katara.”
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 21 of 45
th
9. The learned Trial Court, vide the impugned judgment dated 28
January 2016, convicted the appellant and held as under:
“ 73. In-fact the facts of case K. Prema S. Rao Vs.
Yadla Srinivasa Rao & Ors. (supra) are almost
identical to the facts of present case. Hence, the
law laid down in the said case is clearly applicable
to the facts of present case.
In view of the facts and the legal preposition
discussed above, accused Deepak Katara is
convicted under section 498-A IPC and under
section 306 IPC. However, accused Deepak Katara
is acquitted of the charge u/s. 304-B IPC. Accused
Harpati is acquitted of the charges u/s. 498-A/304-
B/306 IPC framed against her.”
10. Consequent upon the judgment of conviction, the learned Trial Court,
th
vide Order on Sentence dated 29 January 2016, imposed the following
sentence upon the present appellant:
“7. Considering the nature of offence and the
character of convict Deepak Katara, Court does
not find it a fit case to release the convict on
probation of good conduct.
8. Keeping in view all the mitigating and
aggravating circumstances, convict Deepak Katara
is sentenced to simple imprisonment for three years
(3 years) and fine of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. fifty
thousand) for the offence u/s. 498-A IPC. In default
of payment of fine, convict will further undergo
simple imprisonment for four months (4 months).
Convict Deepak Katara is further sentenced to
simple imprisonment for seven years (7 years) and
fine of Rs. 3 lacs (Rs. Three lacs) for the offence
u/s. 306 IPC. In default of payment of fine, convict
will further undergo simple imprisonment for one
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 22 of 45
year (1 year). Both these sentences shall run
concurrently. Benefit of section 428 Cr. P.C. is
extended to convict.
10. It stands proved on record that parents of
deceased spent lot of money on the marriage of
deceased and also paid Rs. 2 lacs to convict after
marriage of deceased. Therefore, out of total fine
of Rs. 3,50,000/-, a sum of Rs. 3 lacs be released to
the parents of deceased Vineeta Katara.”
11. Aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment of conviction dated
28.01.2016 and the order on sentence dated 29.01.2016, the Appellant has
preferred the present appeal before this Court.
Submissions on Behalf of the Appellant
12. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned
judgment dated 28.01.2016 is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the
present case and that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond
reasonable doubt.
13. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the learned
Trial Court erred in convicting the appellant under Section 306 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860, as the essential ingredients of the offence of abetment of
suicide have not been established. It is submitted that there is no evidence to
show that the appellant instigated or provoked the deceased to commit
suicide or performed any act that facilitated the commission of suicide.
14. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that there is no
direct or indirect evidence to establish that the appellant's alleged acts of
cruelty or harassment instigated the deceased to commit suicide. It is
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 23 of 45
contended that the learned Trial Court wrongly presumed that the alleged
acts of cruelty or harassment by the appellant had led the deceased to
commit suicide, despite the absence of any supporting evidence.
15. It is further contended by learned counsel for the appellant that, to
establish an offence under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of
instigation and a connection between such instigation and the commission of
suicide. It is submitted that instigation means to goad, urge, provoke, incite
or encourage a person to do an act. However, in the present case, there is no
evidence to show that the appellant, through any act, omission or continuous
course of conduct, created circumstances that left the deceased with no other
option but to commit suicide.
16. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Trial Court
incorrectly relied upon Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to
draw a presumption of abetment of suicide. It is contended that the
presumption under the said provision is discretionary and not mandatory and
can be drawn only after considering all the circumstances of the case. It is
further submitted that the prosecution has failed to establish a connection
between the alleged cruelty and the suicide. The presumption under Section
113-A is also rebuttable and cannot, by itself, justify the appellant's
conviction.
17. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that even if the
entire prosecution case, including the testimonies of its witnesses and the
documentary evidence, is accepted as true, no offence under Section 306
IPC is made out against the appellant, particularly in view of the settled law
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 24 of 45
18. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the testimonies of the
material prosecution witnesses, namely, the mother of the deceased, Smt.
Meera Sharma (PW-7), the father of the deceased, Sh. Krishan Hari Sharma
@ Ashok Pathak (PW-19), and the brother-in-law of the deceased, Hemant
Gautam (PW-25), contain material contradictions and inconsistencies. It is
contended that their versions of the events of 24.05.2012 and 25.05.2012
differ, particularly regarding the timings and contents of the alleged
telephone conversations with the deceased and the alleged cruelty
committed by the appellant.
19. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the testimony of
Smt. Meera Sharma (PW-7), the mother of the deceased, is unreliable. It is
contended that her claim that the deceased had informed her that the
appellant had thrown her out of the matrimonial home is contrary to the
prosecution's own case, according to which the deceased entered and left the
house several times on the day of the incident, including for the alleged
purpose of making a telephone call from a PCO booth and lodging a
complaint with the police.
20. It is further contended by learned counsel for the appellant that Smt.
Meera Sharma (PW-7) improved upon her earlier statement while deposing
before the Court, as several incriminating details stated in her testimony
were absent from her earlier statement, exhibited as Ex. PW-7/DE. It is
submitted that these improvements cast serious doubt on the credibility of
her testimony.
21. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Trial Court
incorrectly relied upon the alleged complaint made by the deceased at Police
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 25 of 45
Station Mehrauli on 25.05.2012, exhibited as Ex. PW-12/B (DD No. 39B),
despite the prosecution having failed to establish its authenticity and
authorship. It is contended that the complaint does not bear the signatures of
the deceased and mentions her address as Flat No. 3C, whereas she
admittedly resided at Flat No. 4. It is further submitted that this discrepancy
assumes significance because the deceased was a highly educated woman
who had completed her Master's degree in Sociology.
22. It is further contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the
prosecution did not produce any admitted specimen of the deceased's
handwriting for comparison with the handwriting appearing on the alleged
complaint, Ex. PW-12/B (DD No. 39B). It is submitted that the prosecution
has, therefore, failed to establish that the complaint was written by the
deceased, as required under Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872,
and that the learned Trial Court erred in relying upon the same without
proper proof of its authorship.
23. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution's case
is further doubtful because the investigation records repeatedly mention Flat
No. 3C as the place of the incident, whereas the deceased admittedly resided
at Flat No. 4. It is contended that this material discrepancy casts serious
doubt on the accuracy of the investigation and the proceedings relating to
the present case.
24. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the post-
mortem report of the deceased, exhibited as Ex. PW-1/A and Ex. PW-1/B,
and her MLC, exhibited as Ex. PW-5/A, do not record any injuries other
than those attributable to the suicide. It is submitted that this circumstance
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 26 of 45
supports the appellant's contention that the deceased had not been physically
assaulted by him and also casts doubt on the claim of Smt. Meera Sharma
(PW-7) that the deceased had informed her that the appellant had badly
beaten her a day before the incident.
25. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the deceased
had admittedly resided at her parental home in Rawat Bhata, District
Chittorgarh, Rajasthan, for a continuous period of one month and four days
and had returned to her matrimonial home only one day before the incident.
It is contended that the prosecution has failed to establish any specific
incident or circumstance arising after her return that could have led her to
commit suicide. It is further submitted that the post-mortem report and the
MLC do not record any other bodily injuries on the deceased.
26. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, in his statement
recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the
appellant provided an explanation regarding the circumstances preceding the
death of the deceased. It is contended that, a few months before the incident,
a suitcase belonging to the deceased had accidentally fallen, causing certain
educational certificates to fall out. Upon examining the certificates, the
appellant allegedly discovered that the names of the deceased, her father and
her mother were recorded as Vineeta Pathak, Ashok Pathak and Meera
Pathak, respectively, and that they belonged to Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh.
27. It is further contended by learned counsel for the appellant that, upon
making inquiries in Madhya Pradesh, the appellant allegedly discovered that
the father of the deceased had committed a murder, absconded and been
declared a proclaimed offender by a court in Madhya Pradesh. It is
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 27 of 45
submitted that, when the appellant sought an explanation from the deceased
regarding these facts, she went to stay with her parents at Rawat Bhata,
Rajasthan, for one month and four days.
28. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the deceased
subsequently asked her father about these matters and that he admitted them
to be true. It is contended that the deceased expressed concern about facing
society because of her father's past conduct, to which her father allegedly
responded that she should not show her face in public if she could not do so.
It is submitted that these circumstances caused the deceased severe mental
and emotional distress and that the learned Trial Court failed to consider this
alternative explanation for the suicide.
29. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the alleged complaint
made by the deceased at Police Station Mehrauli on 25.05.2012, exhibited as
Ex. PW-12/B (DD No. 39B), does not mention any intention on the part of
the deceased to commit suicide or establish that the appellant had harassed
or instigated her to do so. It is contended that the said complaint does not
establish the essential ingredients of an offence under Section 306 IPC.
30. It is further contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the
photographs marked as Mark PW-7/D1 to D12, which were shown to Smt.
Meera Sharma (PW-7) and admitted by her to be photographs of the
deceased with the appellant, indicate that the parties shared a cordial
relationship. It is submitted that their relationship is further reflected in the
fact that the flat in which they resided with their children had been
purchased by the appellant in the name of the deceased.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 28 of 45
31. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution has not
produced any testimony from the neighbours of the appellant and the
deceased to establish that the parties frequently quarrelled or that the
appellant subjected the deceased to cruelty or harassment. It is contended
that the watchman, Bhagirath (PW-11), categorically deposed that he had
always seen the appellant and the deceased happy and had never heard any
complaint of a quarrel between them. It is submitted that this testimony
contradicts the prosecution's allegations of cruelty and harassment.
32. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the prosecution
has failed to establish that it was the deceased who made a telephone call to
her father's mobile phone from the PCO booth on 25.05.2012, as her name
was not entered in the register maintained by the PCO booth owner, Shyam
Lal (PW-18). It is contended that this circumstance casts doubt on the
prosecution's version of the events preceding the incident.
33. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant
and the deceased had admittedly been married and residing together for five
years before the incident. During this period, neither the deceased nor any
member of her family had made any complaint regarding alleged dowry
demands, cruelty or harassment. It is submitted that the absence of any such
complaint is a relevant circumstance that the learned Trial Court failed to
consider while assessing the prosecution's allegations.
34. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution has
failed to produce any documentary evidence to substantiate the alleged
dowry demands or harassment. It is contended that, in the absence of
supporting evidence, the learned Trial Court erred in relying upon the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 29 of 45
uncorroborated testimony of the father of the deceased, Sh. Krishan Hari
Sharma @ Ashok Pathak (PW-19), regarding the alleged demand of
₹3,00,000 by the appellant and the alleged payment of ₹2,50,000 by the
father of the deceased to the appellant.
35. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the prosecution
is required to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It
is contended that the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant despite
material contradictions, inconsistencies and gaps in the prosecution's
evidence, which create serious doubt regarding the appellant's guilt.
36. It is lastly contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the
impugned judgment is based on conjectures and surmises rather than reliable
evidence establishing the essential ingredients of the alleged offence. It is,
therefore, submitted that the conviction of the appellant is unsustainable in
law and on facts.
37. Learned counsel for the appellant relies upon the judgments of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Naresh Kumar v. State of Haryana , 2024 INSC
149 , and Patel Babubhai Manohardas & Ors. v. State of Gujarat , 2025
INSC 322 , in support of his submissions.
Submissions On Behalf of the Respondent-state
38. Learned APP submits that on 25.05.2012, information was received at
Police Station Mehrauli vide DD No. 27A at about 4:05 PM from Hemant
Gautam, brother-in-law of the deceased, Vineeta Katara, stating that she had
called him around half an hour earlier and informed him that she was going
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 30 of 45
to commit suicide. Thereafter, her phone became unreachable, following
which he requested the police to visit her residence.
39. Learned APP further submits that the police officials reached the
apartment and, upon receiving no response from inside the flat, broke open
the door in the presence of public witnesses. Inside the flat, the deceased,
Vineeta Katara, was found hanging from the ceiling fan, while her daughter,
Harshita, was also found hanging in another room and her son, Harshit, was
found lying dead on the bed with ligature marks on his neck. The police
informed the senior officers, and the SDM, Hauz Khas, was also called to
conduct the inquest proceedings.
40. It is further submitted by Learned APP that the husband of the
deceased, Deepak Katara, was called to the spot, where he identified the
deceased and their two children. On the basis of the circumstances, the
condition of the bodies and the complaint allegedly made by the deceased at
the police station shortly before the incident, an offence under Sections 302,
306 and 498A IPC was made out, and the case was registered accordingly.
41. Learned APP submits that during the investigation, the crime scene
was photographed and inspected by the crime team, relevant exhibits were
collected, and a site plan was prepared. The post-mortem examinations of
the deceased and her two children were conducted at AIIMS on 26.05.2012
in the presence of their relatives and the SDM, Hauz Khas.
42. Learned APP further submits that the father and mother of the
deceased, Sh. Krishan Hari Sharma and Smt. Meera Sharma, stated during
the inquest proceedings and in their statements recorded under Section 161
CrPC that the deceased was married to the appellant in 2007 and that her in-
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 31 of 45
laws had subjected her to cruelty soon after the marriage. They further
alleged that the appellant's brother, Dilip Sharma, had threatened that the
deceased should be killed and that he would deal with the consequences. It
was also alleged that the appellant had demanded ₹50,000 for purchasing a
flat in Jaipur, despite the family having already paid ₹2,00,000 towards the
purchase of a flat in Delhi. The mother of the deceased also alleged that the
appellant's parents had misbehaved with her when she visited Kota to drop
off the deceased.
43. It is contended by Learned APP that the appellant was arrested and
interrogated during the investigation, during which he allegedly admitted to
demanding dowry and subjecting the deceased to torture along with the
other accused persons. It is further submitted that the appellant disclosed
that, following a quarrel with the deceased on the morning of 25.05.2012, he
had broken and thrown away one SIM card and kept both mobile phones
with him to prevent the deceased from contacting her parents. Both mobile
phones were subsequently recovered from his personal search.
44. Learned APP submits that, as per the post-mortem reports, the cause
of death of the deceased, Vineeta Katara, was asphyxia due to antemortem
hanging. The post-mortem reports of both children also recorded asphyxia
due to antemortem hanging by ligature as the cause of death. The viscera of
all three deceased persons were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory,
Rohini, for examination, and the report stated that no metallic poisons,
alcohol, cyanide, phosphide, alkaloids, tranquilizers or pesticides were
detected in the exhibits examined.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 32 of 45
45. Learned APP further submits that, during the investigation,
subsequent medical opinions were obtained, and the father of the deceased
also provided photographs, a DVD of the marriage ceremony of the
deceased and the appellant, and other relevant material. Upon completion of
the investigation, the chargesheet was filed before the learned Trial Court.
46. Learned APP submits that, vide judgment dated 28.01.2016, the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Saket Courts, New Delhi, acquitted the
mother of the appellant of all charges but convicted the appellant under
Sections 306 and 498A IPC. It is further submitted that the appellant's father
was declared a proclaimed offender.
47. Learned APP further submits that, vide order on sentence dated
29.01.2016, the appellant was sentenced to seven years' simple
imprisonment and a fine of ₹3,00,000 for the offence punishable under
Section 306 IPC, and three years' simple imprisonment and a fine of ₹50,000
for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC.
48. Learned APP, accordingly, relies upon the circumstances of the
incident, the statements of the parents of the deceased, the alleged conduct
of the appellant and the evidence collected during the investigation in
support of the conviction recorded by the learned Trial Court.
Findings and Analysis
49. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned APP
for the State and have carefully perused the record.
50. The principal question that arises for consideration is whether the
learned Trial Court committed any error in convicting the appellant for the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 33 of 45
offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860.
51. It is undisputed that Vineeta Katara married the appellant on
20.05.2007 and died on 25.05.2012, within seven years of the marriage. The
medical evidence establishes that Vineeta and her two children died due to
asphyxia consequent upon antemortem hanging. The principal question is
whether the evidence establishes the cruelty attributed to the appellant and,
in turn, his liability for the offences of which he has been convicted.
Section 498-A IPC
52. PW-7, Meera Sharma, the mother of the deceased, deposed that
monetary demands were made during the marriage and that certain demands
were fulfilled by her husband, including the payment of ₹2 lakh in
connection with the purchase of a flat. She further referred to an incident in
October 2011 when Vineeta allegedly approached the police following
harassment by the appellant.
53. According to PW-7, the father-in-law subsequently taunted Vineeta
over her food consumption, spoke of divorce and the appellant’s remarriage,
and later took her to Kota, from where Vineeta allegedly complained that
she was not being provided food.PW-7 further deposed that, on 24.05.2012,
Vineeta telephoned her and stated that the appellant had beaten her the
previous night and had not provided her food.
54. PW-19, Krishan Hari Sharma, father of the deceased, deposed that on
the day preceding Vineeta’s death, he spoke to her over the telephone and
overheard the appellant abusing her over her failure to clean his mother’s
utensils and threatening to kill her. PW-19 also testified that, on 25.05.2012,
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 34 of 45
his wife received a call from Vineeta, who stated that the appellant had
severely beaten her during the previous night and that she intended to die.
Relevant extract of the statements reproduced hereinbelow:
Examination-in-Chief of PW-7
(Mother of the Deceased)
Examination-in-Chief of PW-19
(Father of the Deceased)
In October 2011, my daughter-
Vineeta had gone to police station to
make a complaint against Deepak
and his family, when she was turned
out of her house by Deepak. Police
got the matter sorted out by
counseling Deepak. However, he
again gave beatings to my daughter,
after reaching home, as to why she
had gone to police station.
Even his father telephoned us that
Vineeta eats 2 Kg fruits and 2 Kg
milk, and they want divorce, and they
will get Deepak re-married
elsewhere. We talked with our
daughter, and she gave us
consolation that she will manage.
After a few days, Kedar Nath, father
of Deepak, took my daughter with
him to Kota. From Kota, my
daughter telephoned me that she is
not being given even food and she
asked me to take her to our house.
My son-Ankit went to Kota and
brought her to our house at Rawat
Bhata on 17.04.2012.
My daughter telephoned me on
Prior to one day of death of my
daughter, I had made a call to my
daughter as I wanted to talk my
daughter's children, and at that time,
my daughter had two children — one
son aged about 2 years and one
daughter aged 3½ years. The phone
call was picked up by Deepak Katara
and he told that 'tumhari ladki deidh
mahine tumhare yahan rahi, tumne
usko koi lakshan nahi sikhaye?'. But,
I asked him to get me talked with my
daughter and I talked with my
daughter and also made her
understand to adjust herself.
At that time, I was overhearing the
voice of Deepak Katara on phone as
he was abusing with my daughter
and was also saying that she had not
cleaned the utensils of his mother
and he will kill her, and thereafter, I
disconnected the phone call. The
said incident occurred on the day of
Thursday.
On the next day i.e. on Friday, my
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 35 of 45
24.05.2012 that she was beaten on
that night, after I had left her at
Kota, and she was not even given
food and that she was hungry since
then.
On 25.05.2012, at about 11.30 AM-
12.00 Noon, Vineeta telephoned me
and told that she has been turned out
of the house by Deepak, and her
father-in-law is telling him to kill her
and they will see the consequences.
She had telephoned me from PCO,
as her mobile phone was damaged
by Deepak. I tried to contact her on
her mobile phone, but I could not
connect the call to her.
Thereafter, I talked with Mewa Ram
Katara (Tau of Deepak), and he also
assured me to talk with them. Then, I
talked with Kedar Nath, and asked
him to give the telephone number of
the Guard, as my daughter was
being threatened to be killed by
Deepak, but Kedar Nath replied that
he has no concern if my daughter
was being killed, and if she is killed,
he will cremate her.
wife received a telephone call of my
daughter on her mobile number-
8432581164 at about 11-11.30 AM
and she told that she had given key
of Godrej almirah in the house of
Kota to Deepa and in that almirah,
my daughter had kept all her
jewellery articles and she is going to
die, as her husband had severely
beaten her in the night.
Cross-Examination
It is correct that on 25.05.2012, my
daughter Vinita had called at about
10-11.00 AM from mobile number-
9540915877 to our mobile phone
number-9875196070 and had talked
with my wife. It is wrong to suggest
that Vinita also talked with me on
telephone at that time and had
requested me to come to Delhi and
talk with her in-laws, or that we told
our daughter that she can do
whatever she likes and if she wants
to die, she can die.
I could also hear the voice of
Harpati Devi also on telephone with
Kedar Nath’s voice, and she was
also supporting Kedar Nath. My
daughter was harassed and tortured
a lot by Deepak and his parents
since her marriage. Thereafter, I
could never talk with my daughter.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 36 of 45
55. The complaint, Ex. PW-12/B, attributed to Vineeta and received at
Police Station Mehrauli on 25.05.2012, is also material. In it, she stated that
her husband subjected her to physical assault and mental and bodily
harassment, and that the cruelty inflicted by her husband and in-laws had
increased after he secured government employment. She further stated that
she had remained silent for the sake of her children but was constrained to
approach the police because her husband’s cruel behaviour had worsened.
The defence challenged the genuineness of the complaint on the ground that
it did not bear the deceased’s signature. The learned Trial Court considered
the testimony of PW-12, who deposed to receiving the complaint from
Vineeta, along with the evidence of PW-26 and PW-11 concerning the
subsequent transmission of its stamped copy. This Court finds the reasoning
adopted by the learned Trial Court on this aspect cogent and reasonable and
concurs with its finding. The relevant extract of the complaint reproduced
hereinbelow:
“ म œ नामिवनीताकटाराअपनेपितदीपककटाराकेसा
3C, , 6,
थ ɢ ैटŢ मांक डील ƛ अपाट ŊमŐट पॉकेटनंबर
महरौलीम Ő रहती š ँ। मेरेपितमेरेसाथमारपीटकरतेह œ
औरमुझेमानिसकएवंशारी į रक तौरपरपरेशानकरते
, -
ह œ औरमेरेसाथससुर जेठ
िजठानी , ननद , नंदोई Ȫ ारा भीसमय -
समयपर Ů तािड़त िकयाजातारहताहै।
,
जबसेमेरेपितकीगवन ŊमŐट नौकरीलगीहै तबसेमेरेप
ितवससुरालवालेमुझे Ǜ ादाŮ तािड़त करतेह œ औरमेरे
ससुरमेरेसाथगाली -
,
गलौचकरतेह œ िबनाकपड़ोंकेघरसेबाहरिनकालदेते
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 37 of 45
ह œ। मेरेनंदोईजीपेशेसेवकीलह œ। वोकहतेह œ िकइसे
,
मारडालो म œ बचालूँगा।
अभीतकम œ अपनेब DŽ ों कीवजहसेचुपरही , परंतुअब
मेरेपित Ȫ ारा मेरेसाथ ʩ वहार ब Š त बढ़ताजारहाहै।इ
सकारणम œ į रपोटŊ करनाचाहरही š ँ। “
56. The testimonies of PW-7 and PW-19, read alongside the complaint
dated 25.05.2012, establish that the deceased was subjected to persistent
physical and mental cruelty by the appellant. The allegations of beatings,
deprivation of food, humiliation, and threats of violence, particularly in the
days immediately preceding her death, demonstrate a continuing course of
wilful conduct falling within the ambit of “cruelty” under Section 498-A
IPC. Accordingly, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the learned
Trial Court’s finding on this count.
Acquittal under Section 304-B IPC
57. This Court has also examined the reasoning adopted by the learned
Trial Court in acquitting the appellant of the charge under Section 304-B
IPC and finds no ground to interfere with that finding. Although the
evidence refers to earlier monetary demands, including ₹2 lakh in
connection with the purchase of a flat and a subsequent demand of ₹50,000,
the material concerning the period immediately preceding Vineeta’s death
does not establish that the cruelty then being inflicted upon her was for, or in
connection with, a demand for dowry. Neither the conversations recounted
by her parents on the day preceding her death, nor the complaint attributed
to Vineeta and submitted to the police on 25.05.2012, contains a specific
allegation connecting the contemporaneous cruelty with a dowry demand.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 38 of 45
58. The distinction is material. The evidence of earlier monetary demands
and the evidence of cruelty shortly before Vineeta’s death must not be
conflated. In the absence of sufficient evidence establishing the requisite
connection between dowry-related cruelty and the period soon before death,
an essential ingredient of Section 304-B IPC remains unproved.
Consequently, the statutory presumption under Section 113-B of the Indian
Evidence Act does not arise, and this Court concurs with the learned Trial
Court’s decision to acquit the appellant of the charge under Section 304-B
IPC.
Section 306 IPC
59. The appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 306 IPC. Before adverting to the circumstances preceding the death
of Vineeta Katara, it is necessary to examine the statutory provision
governing the offence and the principles governing its application.
60. Section 306 IPC reads as follows:
“ 306. Abetment of suicide.— If any person
commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of
such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment
of either description for a term which may extend
to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
61. The expression “abetment” is defined under Section 107 IPC and
encompasses instigation to do a thing, engagement in a conspiracy for its
doing in the circumstances specified therein, or intentional aid by an act or
illegal omission. Accordingly, to sustain a conviction under Section 306
IPC, the prosecution must establish not merely that the deceased died by
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 39 of 45
suicide or was subjected to cruelty, but that the accused abetted the
commission of suicide within the meaning of Section 107 IPC.
62. Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, provides that where
a married woman commits suicide within seven years of her marriage and it
is shown that her husband or a relative of her husband had subjected her to
cruelty, the Court may, having regard to all the other circumstances of the
case, presume that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or such
relative. The Explanation to the provision adopts the meaning of “cruelty” as
defined under Section 498-A IPC. Such cruelty includes wilful conduct of a
nature likely to drive a woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury or
danger to her life, limb or mental or physical health, as well as harassment
connected with an unlawful demand for property or valuable security.
63. In Shakuntla Devi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC
952 , the Supreme Court reiterated that conviction under Section 306 IPC
requires proof of an active act or omission, accompanied by the requisite
intention, which led the deceased to commit suicide. Applying this principle
to the facts before it, the Court observed that the persistent torture and abuse
meted out to the deceased, followed by further abuses on the day of the
incident, constituted the circumstances that ultimately led her to take the
extreme step. The decision underscores that the conduct of the accused must
be assessed cumulatively, including the acts immediately preceding the
suicide, rather than in isolation. Relevant extract of the reproduced
hereinbelow:
“The jurisprudence regarding the offence of
abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the IPC is
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 40 of 45
settled that the offence requires an active act or
omission which led the deceased to commit suicide,
and this act or omission must have been intended
to push the deceased into committing suicide. The
facts of the case make it abundantly clear that the
deceased was repeatedly tortured and abused by
the accused on account of dowry demand to the
extent that the deceased had to return to her
parental home seeking refuge. It was only on the
assurance of her parents that the deceased went
back to her matrimonial home hoping that the
events would take an upturn once her parents have
returned from the wedding and settle the matter of
dowry with the appellant-accused. However, the
abuses hurled at the deceased by the appellant on
the day of the incident, i.e. 04.05.1998,
unfortunately acted as a straw that broke the
camel's back and led her to committing suicide.
Therefore, given the factual matrix, the guilt of the
appellant under Section 306 of the IPC has been
proved beyond reasonable doubt.”
64. Similarly, in Siddaling v. State , (2018 ) 9 SCC 621 , the Supreme
Court observed that abetment involves a mental process of instigating a
person or aiding that person in doing a particular act, and that the Court must
carefully assess the facts of each case to determine whether the cruelty
meted out to the deceased induced her to commit suicide. The Court upheld
the conviction under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC, taking into account the
proved circumstances of the appellant’s continued relationship with another
woman, which had caused the deceased mental agony. The decision thus
emphasises the need to examine the nature, continuity and effect of the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 41 of 45
accused’s conduct in the factual context of each case. Relevant extract of the
reproduced hereinbelow:
“The appellant, accused husband, has been
convicted under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
two years and five years, respectively. Marriage of
the appellant Siddaling was solemnised with the
deceased Kavitha on 6-5-2002. Within four months
of the marriage, on 17-9-2002, Kavitha committed
suicide by jumping into a well of the village.
Reason for such extreme step, taken by Kavitha, is
stated to be the harassment due to the alleged
dowry demand and also cruelty meted out to the
deceased Kavitha, as the appellant was having
illicit relationship with one woman.
7. As held in Randhir Singh v. State of Punjab
[Randhir Singh v. State of Punjab, (2004) 13 SCC
129 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 56] vide para 12, abetment
involves a mental process of instigating a person
or in any manner aiding that person in doing of the
thing. Courts should carefully assess the facts of
each case before deciding whether the cruelty
meted out to the victim which induces her to
commit suicide.
8. In the case in hand, the witnesses — PW 1, PW
6, PW 10 and PW 22 have clearly in their
statement stated that the appellant continued his
relation with another woman. The appellant's illicit
relation with another woman would have definitely
created the psychological imbalance to the
deceased which led her to take the extreme step of
committing suicide. It cannot be said that the
appellant's act of having illicit relationship with
another woman would not have affected to negate
the ingredients of Section 306 IPC.”
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 42 of 45
65. In the present case, the testimonies of PW-7 Meera Sharma, the
mother of the deceased, and PW-19 Krishan Hari Sharma, her father, when
read alongside the complaint dated 25.05.2012, bring forth a consistent
account of the deceased being subjected to physical and mental cruelty by
the appellant. PW-7 deposed that the deceased was taunted over her food
consumption, was allegedly deprived of food, and was subjected to repeated
harassment. She further stated that, on 24.05.2012, the deceased informed
her that the appellant had beaten her the previous night and had not provided
her food, and that on 25.05.2012, she received a call from the deceased
stating that the appellant had turned her out of the matrimonial home.
66. These allegations, considered alongside the complaint received by the
police shortly before the incident, indicate that the cruelty was not merely a
matter of past matrimonial discord but was alleged to have continued and
intensified immediately before the deceased’s death. The evidence
concerning earlier police intervention, as deposed to by PW-7, further
suggests that the discord had persisted despite attempts at intervention.
Viewed cumulatively, and subject to the assessment of the omissions and
inconsistencies elicited in cross-examination, these circumstances support
the conclusion that the deceased was subjected to sustained cruelty of a
grave nature, which bears directly on whether the appellant’s conduct
abetted her suicide within the meaning of Section 306 IPC.
67. The deceased died by suicide within seven years of her marriage, and
this Court has found the prosecution evidence sufficient to establish cruelty
within the meaning of Section 498-A IPC. The foundational conditions for
consideration of the presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 43 of 45
are, therefore, satisfied. Having regard to the nature of the cruelty alleged,
the threats attributed to the appellant, the proximity of the incidents to the
death, and the complaint made on the very day of the incident, this Court
finds that the circumstances, taken together, justify drawing the
discretionary presumption that the appellant abetted the deceased’s suicide.
68. The learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon Naresh Kumar
v. State of Haryana, 2024 INSC 149, and Patel Babubhai Manohardas v.
State of Gujarat , 2025 INSC 322 . While both decisions reiterate that mere
harassment is insufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC and
that the presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act is
discretionary, they are distinguishable on facts. In the present case, the
prosecution relies upon the alleged physical assault and threats immediately
preceding Vineeta’s death, as well as the complaint attributed to her and
received by the police on the day of the incident. These circumstances,
unlike the evidence found insufficient in the aforesaid decisions, warrant a
cumulative assessment to determine whether the appellant’s conduct
constituted abetment within the meaning of Sections 107 and 306 IPC.
Accordingly, the aforesaid judgments do not, by themselves, warrant
interference with the appellant’s conviction.
CONCLUSION
69. Accordingly, upon an overall assessment of the evidence and the
circumstances of the case, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the
learned Trial Court’s conviction of the appellant.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 44 of 45
70. The appellant’s sentence was suspended by this Court vide order
dated 27.04.2016. The appellant is directed to surrender before the learned
Trial Court within one month of this judgment, to serve the remaining
sentence.
71. A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Trial Court and
concerned Jail Superintendent for information and necessary compliance.
72. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. Pending applications, if any,
also stand disposed of.
MADHU JAIN
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 28, 2026/RM
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:32:59
CRL.A. 237/2016 Page 45 of 45