Courts must be mindful of societal impact while considering bail in dowry death cases: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said in dowry-death cases, courts must be mindful of the broader societal impact, given that the offence strikes at the very root of social justice and equality.

"Allowing alleged prime perpetrators of such heinous acts to remain on bail, where the evidence indicates they actively inflicted physical, as well as mental, torment, could undermine not only the fairness of the trial but also public confidence in the criminal justice system," a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said.

The apex court cancelled bail of Mukhtar Ahmad, father-in-law, and Tara Bano; mother-in-law granted by the Allahabad High Court in a case related to dowry death of appellant Shabeen Ahmad's sister within two years of her marriage.

The bench said it is unfortunate that in today’s society, dowry deaths remain a grave social concern, and the courts are duty bound to undertake deeper scrutiny of the circumstances under which bail is granted in these cases.

The court said the social message emanating from judicial orders in such cases cannot be overstated, when a young bride dies under suspicious circumstances within barely two years of marriage, the judiciary must reflect heightened vigilance and seriousness.

"A superficial application of bail parameters not only undermines the gravity of the offence itself but also risks weakening public faith in the judiciary’s resolve to combat the menace of dowry deaths. It is this very perception of justice, both within and outside the courtroom, that courts must safeguard, lest we risk normalising a crime that continues to claim numerous innocent lives," the bench said.

The FIR in the case was lodged on January 23, 2024, under Section 498A and 304 B IPC.

Deceased Shahida was married on February 7, 2022, to Sami Khan. Shortly after the marriage, the family members of her matrimonial home- began demanding additional dowry.

The FIR alleged the in-laws first demanded a “Bullet” motorcycle, which the appellant ultimately provided. Thereafter, they allegedly demanded a car, but the appellant, due to financial constraints, sought additional time. It is alleged that because these dowry demands were not completely met, the deceased was subjected to continuous harassment and cruelty.

On January 22, 2024, around 6:15 pm, upon a call, when the appellant, reached the matrimonial home, the deceased’s body was found with a dupatta around her neck, tied to the ceiling fan, and her knees still resting on the bed.

The postmortem report documented multiple ante-mortem injuries, including traumatic contusions on the head and neck, as well as a prominent ligature mark around the neck. Crucially, the cause of death was recorded as “Asphyxia due to ante-mortem strangulation,” suggesting forced strangulation and ruling out suicide, the court noted.

Setting aside the bail granted father-in-law and mother-in-law, the bench said, "Stricter judicial scrutiny is necessary in matters where a young woman loses her life in her matrimonial home so soon after marriage, particularly where the record points to persistent harassment over unmet dowry demands."

The court pointed out equally alarming is the fact that the deceased’s final moments appear to have involved intense violence, evidenced by multiple contusions and injuries that are inconsistent with a mere case of suicide.