Court is not a cure all: Delhi court junks man's plea against closure report in daughter's death case

Some wounds are better left unattended to be ministered by nature with ointment of time, a Delhi court recently said while dismissing a man’s plea against the cancellation report filed by the police in connection with the death of his daughter in 2008 [V K S v. State]..The order under challenge had dismissed the man's protest petition and accepted the cancellation report filed by the police ruling out any foul play and stating it to be a case of suicide..Although the grieving father’s pain was stated to be understandable, Additional Sessions Judge Anuj Aggarwal observed, "The court is not cure all. Some wounds are better left unattended to be ministered by nature with an ointment of time. The court cannot however administer placebo to the revisionist in the name of panacea.”.To arrive at this conclusion, the Court referred to the opinions of three different experts who concluded that it was a case of suicide by partial hanging and ruled out the possibility of any foul play. The order junking the father’s protest petition was, therefore, stated to have “no infirmity.”.A murder case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was registered after the victim was found lying on a bed with a wire tied around her neck. The other end of the wire, it had come on the record, was found tied to one of the legs of a table adjacent to the bed. A flatmate of hers found her lying motionless and alerted the landlord, who reported the incident to the police..The police found that there was only a single entry and exit to the rooms occupied by the women, who lived on a sharing basis. The gate had an inbuilt lock and all the occupants had a separate key. The acquaintances the deceased was in touch with were thoroughly interrogated after the incident..The case file was submitted to the department of forensic medicine, Maulana Azad Medical College for its opinion on whether it was a case of homicide or suicide. An expert at the College, as well as the Director of Medico Legal Institute, Bhopal concluded that it was a suicide..Thereafter, the police filed a cancellation report, which was accepted on July 13, 2012 by a magistrate court. In that order, it was observed, “It was a case of self strangulation in a lying down position. The photographs coupled with the expert opinion leaves no doubt that it was a case of suicide.”The father, through his counsel, challenged the order stressing that there were injuries on the deceased’s body and her physical state suggested that she was raped and murdered.“Magistrate failed to appreciate that the scene of crime indicated that there was violence in the room as ear phone of deceased was found broken indicating that she was subjected to physical assault,” the counsel submitted.The order under challenge was also stated to be completely silent on the issues raised by man in his protest petition filed against the cancellation report.The State, on the contrary, argued that the Magistrate Court had rightly observed that there was no merit in the protest petition as the revisionist’s objections were “frivolous”..The Court held that under revision jurisdiction, it was not expected to substitute its own view with that of the trial court unless the latter’s order suffered from a jurisdictional error or a patent infirmity.“In the instant case, as evident from record, the Magistrate while narrating (in detail) the facts, crime scene and expert opinion, passed a well reasoned detailed order, thereby accepting the cancellation report while brushing aside the protest petition of the revisionist and therefore, this court cannot and rather ought not substitute its own view with that of the Magistrate (while exercising its revision jurisdiction) and thereby arriving at a different conclusion,” it held..[Read Order]