The main legal point established is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, and the need to avoid undue hardship from detention pending trial.

JUDGMENT :

1. This bail application has been filed seeking regular bail in FIR No. 32/2021 PS Sonia Vihar under sections 498A/304B/34 IPC. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 30th January, 2021. The charge-sheet and supplementary charge-sheet were filed in April, 2021 and November, 2021 respectively. The petitioner is 27 years of age and prior to his arrest was employed with an international food delivery company.

2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 29th January, 2021, pursuant to a PCR call regarding reporting murder of a girl at House No.D-2/607, Gali No.6, III Pusta, Sonia Vihar, Delhi, the police team went to the place of occurrence where in the room on the first floor, they found body of the victim Kanchan Pandey, wife of the petitioner, lying on the bed. Investigation revealed that on 22nd November 2019 the deceased had married the petitioner. The crime team was called who prepared their own report and took photographs. The IO seized two portions of chunni through a seizure memo as the same was apparently used for hanging by the deceased. The MLC was collected from GTB Hospital and the body was preserved in the mortuary. Thereafter in the inquest proceedings before the Executive Magistrate, the mother of deceased Ms. Subhashini Pandey alleged that her daughter was being harassed and tortured by her in-laws and her husband on the pretext of dowry and held them responsible for the death of her daughter. The post mortem was conducted in which the doctors opined the time since death was about 6 hours and the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. Thereafter the case was registered as per the instant FIR. The statements of witnesses were recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. and the mobile phones of the deceased and that of the petitioner were seized. The petitioner was then arrested on 30th January, 2021. The mother-in-law Smt. Vidya Devi was also arrested on 7th April 2021. The two mobile phones were later sent to FSL and the chunni as well for the opinion of the ligature mark on the neck.

3. The opinion received from GTB Hospital was that the ligature marks mentioned in the post mortem report can be produced by hanging via the chunni exhibited. Subsequently the charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner and the mother-in-law and the supplementary charge-sheet was filed against the sister-in-law and the brother-in-law as well. Even though the FSL result was received, the data could not be extracted because it was password protected. Subsequently on 3rd August, 2022 the petitioner provided his password pattern for unlocking the phone. On unlocking the phone, it was sent again to the FSL. On 19th September, 2022 charges under section 498A/304B/34 IPC were framed and prosecution evidence is currently underway.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended in support of the bail application that since the investigation was complete, the petitioner was not required for any further investigation, the trial would take a long time and he was still not proven guilty and therefore, should be released from custody. He also submitted that he is only 27 years of age, his parents are dependent on his income and he was gainfully employed and any continued incarceration would affect his livelihood.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the prosecution is basically dependent on statements made by the family members of the deceased which will ultimately have to be proved during trial. There is nothing in the statements, in any event, that demands of dowry were made soon before the death of the deceased, there is no document to support the same. The brother and sister of the petitioner have both been granted on bail on 14th September, 2021. The mother of the petitioner has been released on 4th February, 2022 pursuant to an order of this Court. Further, the information of death of the deceased was given by the petitioner himself and he immediately surrendered his