The court ruled that allegations of dowry demand and torture, combined with the circumstances of an unnatural death, justify the presumption of guilt against the in-laws, warranting the denial of anticipatory bail.

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA SEN, J.

Heard the parties.

2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Sukhdeonagar (Pandra) P.S. Case No.342 of 2024, for offence under Section 304 (B) of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Court of learned J.M.-XXXI, Ranchi.

3. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is that on 20.06.2024, the informant received news of his daughter Puja Paswan’s death. She was married with Devesh Kumar Ranjan in the year 2023. After marriage, she was subjected to demand of dowry and torture by her husband and in-laws. She later discovered her husband’s affair with a woman named Priyanka Kumari. Upon confronting him, she was assaulted and was driven out. She informed her parents about the abuse. Puja’s in-laws and husband had been pressuring her for the demand of Rs 25 lakhs and to handover a plot of land which was purchased in her name. Later, her body was found with injury marks.

4. Learned counsel representing the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent and they are being falsely implicated and there was no demand of dowry or torture by these petitioners. It is further submitted that the allegations in the FIR are false and baseless. The deceased was short- tempered and took her own life due to personal issues and not due to dowry harassment. It is further submitted that the case should fall under Section 306 IPC and not under Section 304-B. It is further submitted that just five days before her death, the deceased had come home willingly. She was suffering from depression and anxiety which was confirmed by a doctor. The husband has already surrendered, and the post-mortem report shows death by hanging.

5. The learned APP representing the State and learned counsel representing the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that the petitioners are involved in the offence and according to the inquest and post-mortem report, there was external injuries on the deceased’s body, including reddish abrasions on the right forearm caused by a hard, blunt object. These injuries, along with ligature marks, were found to be ante-mortem, indicating she was assaulted before death. It is further submitted that Investigating officer has also examined independent witnesses who have confirmed the prosecution case. Further, the body was found on the floor of the matrimonial home. Petitioners also moved the body without informing the police, which raises suspicion.

6. This Court finds that marriage had taken place only on 2023. There is an allegation of demand of dowry and torture. Death is unnatural and not caused in ordinary circumstance. Though there is direct allegation against the husband the fact which cannot be lost sight of is that the petitioners are the in- laws and as per the provision of law they are presumed to be guilty.

7. In view of the allegation of demand of dowry and torture and unnatural death, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to these petitioners, even though learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this is a case of suicide.

8. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.