logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 SC 506 print Preview print Next print
Court : Supreme Court of India
Case No : Criminal Appeal No. of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 2374 of 2026)
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI
Parties : Istak Versus State of UP & Another\r\n
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: ------ For the Respondents: -----
Date of Judgment : 20-03-2026
Head Note :-
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3/4  -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 498-A and 304-B)
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (Sections 3/4)

2. Catch Words:
- Bail
- Dowry death
- Presumption of innocence
- Appeal
- Remand
- Surrender

3. Summary:
The appeal challenges a High Court order granting bail to the accused in a dowry‑death case under IPC §§ 498‑A, 304‑B and the Dowry Prohibition Act §§ 3/4. Counsel for the respondents sought a fresh consideration of bail. The Court noted that the presumption of innocence does not apply in dowry‑death cases within seven years of marriage. Consequently, the bail order was set aside and the matter remanded to the High Court for a merits‑based reconsideration. The accused was directed to surrender within two weeks and may seek an early hearing thereafter. The appeal was allowed, and any pending applications were disposed of.

4. Conclusion:
Appeal Allowed
Judgment :-

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The impugned order in this appeal is of 11.08.2025 passed by the High Court granting bail to the respondent No.2, 'Mustkeem' in connection with FIR No. 157 of 2024 registered with Police Station Dankaur, District-Gautam Buddh Nagar under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

4. After some initial arguments, learned counsel for the respondent(s) submits that it will be better if the matter is sent back to the High Court for reconsideration of the bail afresh on merits.

5. In view of the above and the fact that the presumption of innocence was not available in a dowry death case, which is within seven years of the marriage, we set aside the impugned order dated 11.08.2025 and remand the matter to the High Court for reconsideration of the bail afresh on merits in accordance with law.

6. Since the bail order has been set aside, the respondent No.2 is directed to surrender within two weeks.

7. The respondent No.2 is at liberty to move to the High Court for early hearing of the bail application after surrendering.

8. The present appeal stands allowed in the above terms.

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
 
  CDJLawJournal