New Delhi, May 10, KDC: Invoking Mahatma Gandhi’s strong words against the social evil of dowry, the Supreme Court has cancelled the bail granted to a man accused in a dowry death case, observing that crimes against women cannot be taken lightly. The apex court, while setting aside the Allahabad High Court’s bail order, recalled Gandhi’s remark that “any young man who makes dowry a condition to marriage discredits his education and his country and dishonours womanhood.”
Setting aside the High Court’s bail order, the apex court, according to news agency Kashmir Dot Com, cancelled the bail granted to the accused husband, Prince Chaudhary, who is facing allegations of killing his wife over dowry demands in Uttar Pradesh’s Ghaziabad district.
A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Vijay Bishnoi said the High Court committed a “serious error” by overlooking the gravity of the allegations and the evidence placed on record.
According to the prosecution, the woman died under suspicious circumstances at her matrimonial home on July 11, 2024, within seven years of marriage. Her father alleged that despite spending more than Rs 30 lakh during the marriage, including cash, jewellery and a car, the husband’s family continued demanding a Toyota Fortuner and an additional Rs 10 lakh as dowry.
The Supreme Court observed that the High Court wrongly relied on an alleged delay in registration of the FIR while granting bail. The apex court pointed out that the FIR was lodged the very next day after the woman’s death and questioned how such a delay could justify bail in a serious dowry death case.
The bench also referred to the post-mortem report, which recorded ligature marks around the victim’s neck and stated the cause of death as asphyxia due to strangulation.
Expressing concern over rising dowry deaths, the Supreme Court noted that thousands of women continue to lose their lives due to dowry-related violence despite social and educational progress.
The court directed the accused to surrender within one week and instructed the trial court to complete the trial within one year. It clarified that its observations were limited to the issue of bail and would not influence the final outcome of the trial. (KDC)
