The Delhi High Court granted bail to a man accused in a dowry death case, stating that mere suspicion of an extramarital relationship or marital discord is insufficient to attract charges of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court emphasized the necessity of concrete evidence for such serious charges.
The case involves the tragic death of a woman, Shivani Singh, who died by suicide in March 2024. Her husband, Anshul, was arrested and charged under Sections 498A, 304B, and alternatively 306 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was harassed over dowry demands and suspected her husband of having an affair, which allegedly led to her taking her own life.
However, Justice Sanjeev Narula observed:
“Mere suspicion of an affair or even strained relations, without more, does not meet the threshold of instigation or provocation required under Section 306 IPC.”
The prosecution based its claims on statements from the deceased's family, alleging that Anshul had a relationship with a colleague named Sarita, and that he physically abused the deceased. They also accused him of pressuring her to arrange car loan payments from her family. Yet, no formal complaint was ever made by the deceased or her family during her lifetime regarding these alleged dowry demands.
The Court found several inconsistencies. Notably, it was verified that the car’s EMI payments were made by the husband himself. Furthermore, the forensic evidence, including videos and chats submitted by both sides, did not conclusively support the claims of harassment or direct abetment.
Justice Narula further highlighted:
“An extramarital affair, per se, does not amount to cruelty under Section 498A IPC or abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC unless it is pursued in a way that torments or harasses the deceased.”
He referred to established judgments where the Supreme Court stated that mental cruelty needs clear, proximate, and dowry-linked harassment to attract the provisions of Sections 304B or 306 IPC.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court: Woman’s Suicide Outside Matrimonial Home Still Counts As Dowry Death
The Court also pointed out that:
“The absence of any contemporaneous grievance prima facie dilutes the immediacy and plausibility of the dowry-related harassment claim.”
The judgment acknowledged that while the death occurred within seven years of marriage, fulfilling one condition under Section 304B IPC, the crucial elements of harassment or cruelty related to dowry demands soon before death were not adequately established.
Since the investigation was complete and the trial was still at an early stage, with no risk of the accused tampering with evidence or fleeing, the Court found no justification for continued detention.
“The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at trial, not to inflict punishment prior to conviction,” the judge added.
Thus, the Delhi High Court granted bail to Anshul with several conditions, including regular reporting to the investigating officer and not contacting prosecution witnesses.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Senior Advocate with Ms. M. Begum, Mr. Shailendra Singh, Mr. Harsh Chaudhary, Mr. Ishaan Jain, Ms. Avneet Kaur, Mr. Sumit Singh and Mr. Surya Pratap, Advocates
Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State; Mr. M.N. Jha, Mr. Sarvesh Kumar and Ms. Meenakshi, Advocates for Complainant
Title: ANSHUL v. STATE
