Punjab and Haryana HC grants bail to husband in ‘dowry poisoning’ case, notes no ‘external injuries’ on complainant

The FIR, registered at Rori police station in Sirsa district on September 16, 2024, alleged that since the date of marriage, the complainant had been subjected to harassment over dowry demands by her husband and in-laws. It was further alleged that on September 14, 2024, the petitioner, along with other family members, forcibly administered a poisonous substance used for drying and burning grass.

The court recorded that it was “not disputed that both the complainant and the petitioner were admitted in the hospital on account of consumption of the same substance on the same date.” Referring to the medical opinion placed on record, the court noted that it “at least prima facie, records absence of external injuries and notes improbability of forcible administration.”

The petitioner had argued that he too consumed the substance following an altercation and that the complainant had snatched it from him. He has been in custody for one year, four months, and 12 days. The court also noted that the investigation was complete, the challan had been presented and charges framed, but “the prosecution witnesses have not come forward to depose despite opportunities.”

Citing settled principles on bail, the court observed that the Supreme Court has consistently held that prolonged pre-trial incarceration militates against the fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution and that “bail is the rule and jail is the exception,” particularly where the trial is likely to take considerable time. It added that “the object of bail is to secure the presence of the accused at trial and not to inflict pre-conviction punishment.”

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the court held that “further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any useful purpose,” while clarifying that no opinion was being expressed on the merits.

The petitioner has been directed to furnish bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate or Duty Magistrate concerned. The court imposed conditions, including that he shall not misuse the liberty granted, shall not tamper with evidence, shall not absent himself during trial, shall not commit any offence while on bail, and shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial court. He has also been directed to share his mobile number with the investigating officer and not change it without prior permission from the trial court.

The state and the complainant have been granted liberty to seek cancellation of bail in case of breach of any condition.