Statutory presumption of dowry death justified denial of bail amid prima facie cruelty allegations.

Pooja Chakradhari, wife of the applicant Rakesh Chakradhari, died at her matrimonial home on 27 May 2025, within seven years of marriage.

A merg inquiry was initially conducted, statements of her parents, relatives and other witnesses were recorded, and a post-mortem examination was performed.

The FSL report allegedly detected Paraquat herbicide in the deceased’s viscera.

The prosecution alleged that the applicant subjected the deceased to cruelty and harassment in connection with dowry demands, including a large LED television and a motorcycle, and also assaulted her and suspected her character.

It was further alleged that the applicant brought the deceased to CHC Bilha on the ground that she had suffered an electric shock, whereas she had allegedly consumed poison.

Section 80(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), was added during investigation.

The applicant surrendered and was arrested on 29 January 2026; the charge-sheet was filed on 2 February 2026.

He sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), contending, inter alia, that the FIR was lodged after an unexplained delay of more than six months, the allegations were matters for trial, he had no criminal antecedents, and only two of thirty-five prosecution witnesses had been examined.

1. Whether the applicant, accused of dowry death under Section 80(2) of the BNS, should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, having regard to the allegations of dowry-related cruelty, the FSL report and the stage of trial.

2. Whether the statutory presumption of dowry death under Section 118 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, together with the allegation that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment soon before her death, justified rejection of bail at that stage.

The Court applied Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail; Section 80(2) of the BNS, 2023, relating to dowry death; and Section 118 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, which provides that when a woman’s death is in question and it is shown that, soon before her death, she was subjected by the accused to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, a dowry demand, the Court “shall presume” that such person caused the dowry death.

The Court also applied the settled bail principle that the nature and gravity of the accusation, the prima facie material, and the statutory presumptions applicable to the alleged offence are relevant considerations at the stage of bail.

The Court found prima facie material against the applicant: the deceased was his wife, she died at her matrimonial home within seven years of marriage, and Paraquat was allegedly detected in her viscera.

The prosecution statements attributed dowry-related cruelty and harassment to the applicant, including demands for an LED television and a motorcycle, as well as assault and suspicion regarding the deceased’s character.

Although the applicant relied on the delayed FIR, the alleged matrimonial dispute concerning separate residence, his conduct in taking the deceased for medical treatment, the absence of criminal antecedents, and the slow progress of trial, the Court held that these matters required evidentiary assessment during trial and did not outweigh the prima facie allegations and the statutory presumption under Section 118 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.

In view of the alleged cruelty connected with dowry demands “soon before” the death, the Court concluded that bail was not warranted at that stage.

The Court nevertheless directed or expected the trial Court to make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within six months from receipt of the certified order, subject to there being no legal impediment.