JUDGMENT

SANJEEV NARULA, J.:

1. The Applicant, through the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (“BNSS”) (formerly Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (“Cr.P.C.”)), seeks regular bail in FIR No. 166/2024 under Sections 498A, 304B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, (“IPC”), registered at P.S. Geeta Colony.

Factual Background

2. Brief facts, as set out by the prosecution, is as follows:

2.1. On 19th March, 2024, a PCR call, recorded vide DD No. 08A, reported the suspected suicide of a woman named Shivani Singh. The assigned ASI immediately reached Makkar Multi-Specialty Hospital, located in Priyadarshini Vihar, Delhi, where he obtained MLC No. 580/23-24, which recorded that Shivani Singh, aged 32, had been brought dead to the emergency department.

2.2. Upon inspection of the matrimonial home, where the incident allegedly occurred, it was found that the deceased had died by hanging herself during the late hours of 18th March, 2024. A ligature and a vegetable cutting knife were recovered from the scene and seized.

2.3. Investigation revealed that the deceased married the Applicant on 8th November, 2019. Since the death occurred within seven years of the marriage, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gandhi Nagar, was informed telephonically in compliance with Section 174 of the CrPC. Statements of the deceased’s father, mother, and sister were recorded. They alleged that the deceased had, during telephonic conversations, disclosed that the Applicant was having an extra-marital affair with his office colleague named Sarita. When confronted, the Applicant allegedly began physically abusing the deceased. It was further claimed that, in the year preceding her death, she had been regularly subjected to domestic violence. They also alleged that the Applicant, having purchased a car, repeatedly pressured the deceased to secure EMI payments from her family, and that he had threatened to kill her if the money was not arranged.

2.4 The Complainant (father of the deceased) stated that on 18th March, 2024, at about 10:25 PM, he received a WhatsApp call from his daughter, during which she said that her husband was pressuring her to arrange the car loan instalment payments. The call was traced on his mobile phone, which was subsequently seized and forwarded to the FSL for data retrieval and expert examination.

2.5. During the investigation, the Complainant submitted photographs, chat transcripts, and two video recordings, allegedly showing the Applicant’s relationship with Sarita. One of the videos also purportedly captures the Applicant verbally abusing and physically assaulting the deceased. These materials were sent to the FSL for forensic authentication.

2.6. The accused persons also submitted two video recordings in their defence. On examination, these were found to relate to the retirement celebration of the Applicant’s father. In one of the recordings, the deceased is seen stating that she entered the family as a daughter-in-law and was treated by her father-in-law as his own daughter. However, no reference to the Applicant is made in the video.

2.7. Following completion of investigation, a chargesheet was filed and by order dated 13th February, 2025 charges against the Applicant under Sections 498A and 304B of the IPC, and, in the alternative, under Section 306 IPC, have been framed. The Applicant has pleaded not guilty and has sought to stand trial.

Applicant’s Case

3. Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Senior Counsel for the Applicant, contends that the Applicant has been falsely implicated and seeks bail on the following grounds:

3.1. The case of prosecution, rests largely on uncorroborated allegations made by the deceased’s family. The FIR, in broad terms, implicates all family members and attributes the Applicant’s role without any direct or substantive evidence. The core allegation, that the Applicant compelled the deceased to seek financial assistance from her parents to pay instalments for a car is whol