Anticipatory Bail Granted in Attempt to Murder in Dowry Case: A.P. HC

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has issued anticipatory bail to a family that is accused of demanding dowry from the complainant's daughter-in-law and attempting to strangle her to death.

Justice Subba Reddy Satti noted that although there were disagreements between the husband (petitioner no. 1) and wife (complainant), the entire family had been drawn into the controversy.

The family was charged with violating sections 307 and 498-A, read with section 34, of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, the "IPC") and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter, the "DP Act").

The prosecution argued that the first defendant, along with his parents, siblings, and brothers, harassed the complainant for dowry. The complainant claimed that the defendants beat her and, when she fell to the ground, attempted to strangle her with a scarf. She discussed the incident with her uncle and filed a formal complaint in March 2022.

The petitioners' counsel maintained that they were falsely implicated in the case. He insisted that, based on the allegations in the complaint, section 498-A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act could be invoked against the petitioners, but not section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. In addition, it was asserted that the complainant had not undergone a medical examination, nor had a wound certificate been produced to demonstrate the injuries she sustained. They argued that the petition included the entire family of the first petitioner.

The Special Assistant Public Prosecutor objected to the bail request. He argued that the investigation was still ongoing and that the petitioners' attempt to murder the complainant was a violation of section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, making them ineligible for pre-arrest bail.

The court stated that the prosecution did not produce any evidence regarding the complainant's injuries. In light of the facts and circumstances of the case and the disputes between the first petitioner and the complainant, the court ruled that all of the first petitioner's family members must be included. The court deemed it sufficient to grant petitioners pre-arrest bail.

Each of them has been ordered to post a Rs. 20,000 self-bond with two Rs. 20,000 sureties. They must also cooperate with the investigation and refrain from tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

D.D: 28-06-2022

Syed Bilal & Ors versus. State of Andhra Pradesh