Conduct Of Accused, Gravity Of Offence, Societal Impact Are Grounds To Revoke A Bail

Key Takeaways

• The name of the case related to this judgement was Vipan Kumar Dhir V. State of Punjab.
• The verdict was granted by CJI NV Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli.
• While setting aside the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court of Punjab, the court observed that a superior court can revoke bail if the inferior court has failed to consider important material given in the record of evidence or has considered immaterial factors.

Background

• The case is related to dowry and falls under 304B and 302 r/w 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
• The accused was married to the appellant's daughter on 28.7.2017. The in-laws were charged with harassing and torturing the deceased for dowry demands. The deceased died an unnatural death in suspicious situations as per the FIR lodged by the father on 2.10.2017.
• The mother-in-law was charged with various allegations specifically. These included exploiting the deceased and abstaining her from recovering because of tiring and difficult household work.
• After the FIR was filed, the mother-in-law filed for anticipatory bail which was rejected by the Sessions Court. Then she moved to the High Court where again the bail was dismissed. An arrest warrant was issued against her but it could not be executed as she ran away and thus was declared as an absconder under Section 82 of Cr.P.C.
• When her younger son was granted anticipatory bail, she returned, and taking the advantage of that, she filed two petitions before the Court. She wanted the order declaring her an “absconder” to be revoked and also filed for anticipatory bail as a relief.

Courts Observation

• The court observed that a superior court can revoke the order granted by the inferior court if it is found that the inferior court has either considered immaterial factors or has not taken into consideration important factors while granting such bails to the accused.
• It further observed that the mother-in-law had run away for 2 years after she was declared an “absconder.” Such behavior of the accused was not taken into consideration by the High Court while granting her bail.
• The court pointed out that the Supreme Court can interfere if grounds like the conduct of the accused, gravity of the offense,and societal impacts of such crimes are not considered while deciding such a case. It further said that these grounds need to be considered to deliver fair justice and at the same time to not undermine the administration of criminal justice.
• While setting aside the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court of Punjab to the mother-in-law, the Court stated that despite many attempts by the legislature and the judiciary there still needs to be many changes related to such terrible cases that take place in our society.

Courts Order

• The death of the deceased was a matter of grief because she died within three months of marriage but at the same time, it is too prompt to term the crime under Section 304B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, the court ordered an Investigating Agency to investigate the role of the accused because the deceased died in the matrimonial house under the suspicious circumstance and set aside the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court of Punjab.

The High Courts' decision to grant the bail to the mother-in-law was fair or not? When do we anticipate the introduction of proper laws to protect a married woman from such heinous crimes even in this generation of revolution? Share your views in the comments section.