Asphyxia as a Result of Antemortem Hanging - Contradicts Prosecution’s Strangulation Claim - Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Husband

\In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court today granted regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 377/2017, involving charges under Sections 306/201/498A/302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Justice Vikas Mahajan presided over the case, which has garnered considerable attention due to the serious nature of the allegations, including dowry and alleged murder.

The petitioner, represented by Mr. Habibur Rehman, was accused of causing his wife’s death. In a detailed judgment, the court meticulously dissected the evidence presented, highlighting inconsistencies and gaps that tilted the balance in favor of the petitioner.

A pivotal point in the judgment was the emphasis on the post mortem report, which indicated the cause of death as asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. Justice Mahajan noted, “In view of the categoric opinion of the doctor that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, it prima facie, appears that the medical evidence is not in accord with the prosecution version.” This observation played a crucial role in undermining the prosecution’s case, which alleged strangulation by the petitioner.

The court also carefully considered the credibility of the witnesses, including the children of the petitioner, who were in the custody of their maternal grandparents since the incident. The possibility of their statements being influenced could not be ruled out, the court observed.

In granting bail, Justice Mahajan referred to several precedents set by the Supreme Court, underscoring the factors to be considered in bail applications. These include the nature and gravity of the offense, the severity of the punishment, the likelihood of the accused absconding, and the potential for tampering with evidence or witnesses.

The defense argued that the petitioner had been incarcerated since July 31, 2017, and that most material witnesses had already been examined, negating the possibility of influencing them. Furthermore, the court was informed that the petitioner had remarried and his current wife was expecting, adding a personal dimension to the case.

The court imposed specific conditions for the grant of bail, including a directive for the petitioner not to leave the city without prior permission and to appear before the court as required.

Date of Decision: 20.11.2023

RIHAN VS THE STATE (GNCTD)