Gauhati High Court Dismisses a Bail Application in a Dowry Death Matter, restating the Nature and Seriousness of the offence

Must Read

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions,...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by...

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour...

Follow us

Jakir Hussain Mandal married the sister of the Complainant on 10.8.2019. After a few days of marriage, the accused harassed her mentally and tortured her physically. He demanded a motorcycle and money for doing business. 

The Family of the victim tried to resolve the dispute by giving financial help. But the eagerness of the accused not satisfied. On 12.1.2020 the accused informed the family of the victim that she died in a rail accident. The family of victim alleges that this is not an accident but she had been killed. 

Contention of the Applicant

Karim Ali Mondal and Anowar Hussain Mondal filed an application of anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the case of dowry death under Section 304(B) of Indian Penal Code. Due to the pandemic COVID-19, the proceedings have been conducted virtually. 

Contention of the Respondent

That the application is pending since 2.3.2020 as the counsel of the applicant is not appearing before the court. Further, there is no reason to adjourn the matter for an extended period. Also, there must be deposition of this application by using the statutory provision of the Indian Penal Code and the Indian Evidence Act. Moreover, the dying declaration of the victim was not found in the investigation. Therefore, this proves that this was not a case of dowry death. 

Legal Aspect

The essential ingredients of Section 304 (B) are:-

    • the death of women on account of unnatural causes; 
    • death within seven-year of marriage and 
    • before the death, there is cruelty or harassment by husband or relative of the husband or in connection, there is any demand for dowry.

These ingredients also attract Section 113(B) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 113(B) states that there is a presumption that death is dowry death.

Court Judgment

The Court considered Section 304(B) of IPC in conjunction with Section 113(B) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It held that it is prima facie evident that death is dowry death. They observed the nature and seriousness of the offence. Consequently, they denied the grant of bail in favour of the applicant. Hence, the Applicant’s application was dismissed


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her...

Punjab Woman Accuses Punjab Police of Keeping Husband in Illegal Custody and Framing Him in a False Case

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her...

Addition of Words as Prefixes or Suffixes Is an Infringement of a Registered Trademark: Delhi High Court

Justice Jayanth Nath allowed the Times Group to use its registered trademark “Newshour”, in the case of Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd v. ARG Outlier...

Just Because the Deceased Did Not Have License, Does Not Imply He Was Negligent: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the case of Hemlal & Others v. Dayaram & Others, a Single Bench of Chhattisgarh High Court consisting of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal annunciated various...

Hoardings Are Movable Property Under Section 2(3) of DMC Act Subject To the Twin Test: Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi International Airport v South Delhi Metropolitan Corporation discussed in detail the provision under Section 2(3) of the DMC...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -