STATE vs SANJEEV TANEJA & ANR

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of reserving Judgment: 9th October, 2025 Date of decision: 6th February, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF: + CRL.A. 131/2002 STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for the State. versus SANJEEV TANEJA & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Puneet Ahluwalia, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL KUMAR YADAV JUDGMENT VIMAL KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. “Where words are scarce, they are seldom spent in vain, For they breathe truth that breathe their words in pain.” William Shakeshpeare. 2. Keeping that dictum in forefront, the prosecution assails the judgement, handed down by the Trial Court, claiming that it suffers from illegality since proper attention was not given to the tongue of the dying lady, namely, Jyoti Taneja. Torture and grief, suffered by her at the hands of her husband and sister-in-law, portrayed in the suicide note Ex. PW8/B, led her to end her life. Her versions could not draw attention of the Trial Court Signature Not Verified Signed By:ASHOK CRL.A. 131/2002 Page 1 of 28 KUMAR CHOUHAN Signing Date:06.02.2026 17:39:30 and miscarriage of justice took place, claims the prosecution, in the appeal under consideration. 3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts of the controversy are that on 09th December, 1990, Jyoti Taneja was taken to Mool Chand Hospital, where she was declared brought dead. There was a ligature mark around her neck. The MLC was prepared and police was informed. Shri Jagdish Chander Vohra, the father of the deceased lodged a report with police of Police Station Lajpat Nagar, which culminated into an FIR for offences punishable under Section 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code). Investigation was taken up.