Granting Bail In Dowry Death Cases Despite Evidence Of Direct Involvement Shakes Public Confidence In Judiciary : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday (March 3) cancelled the bail granted to a father-in-law and a mother-in-law in a case of alleged dowry death of their daughter-in-law, after observing that there was prima facie evidence regarding dowry demand and domestic violence.

"When a young bride dies under suspicious circumstances within barely two years of marriage, the judiciary must reflect heightened vigilance and seriousness," the Court said criticising the High Court's "mechanical approach" in granting bail.

The case pertains to the death of a woman Ms. Shahida Bano in January 2024, within two years of her marriage. She was found dead in her matrimonial home with a dupatta tied around her neck and tied to a ceiling fan. Since the post-mortem report suggested forced strangulation before death, a case was registered for the offences under Section 304B(dowry death), 498A(cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code and the provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the husband and in-laws of the deceased.

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the father-in-law, mother-in-law, and two sisters-in-law, citing lack of criminal antecedents etc. Challenging the High Court's order, the father of the deceased appealed to the Supreme Court.

A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta noted that the case records suggested that the victim underwent extreme brutality in connection with a pattern of dowry demands.

"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 observed.

The Court warned that casually granting bail to accused in such cases will shake the public confidence in the judiciary given the broad societal impact of dowry death cases.

"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," the Court added.

"Where the facts clearly indicate direct involvement in the fatal events, courts must act with an abundance of caution. Thus, permitting the father-in-law and mother-in-law to remain at large would run counter to the ends of justice, especially when the evidence reflects a probable nexus between their persistent dowry demands, physical cruelty, and the deceased's death," the Court stated.

Advocating a deeper scrutiny in such cases, the Court said :

"It is unfortunate that in today's society, dowry deaths remain a grave social concern, and in our opinion, the courts are duty- bound to undertake deeper scrutiny of the circumstances under which bail is granted in these cases. 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."

While the bail granted to the parents-in-law was cancelled, the Court did not interfere with the relief granted to the sisters-in-law.

Case : Shabeen Ahmed v State of UP

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 278

Click here to read the judgment