Delhi High Court – Orders
Saddak vs State Nct Of Delhi on 1 May, 2025
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 21/2025
SADDAK .....Applicant
Through: Mr. Imran, Mr. Asim
Naeem, Mr. Khalid
Abdula, Mr. M.Z. Khan,
Advs.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam,
APP for the State.
Insp. Sudhir Rathi, PS
Narela Indl. Area.
Mr. Sauraj Yadav, Adv.
through V.C for victim.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
ORDER
% 01.05.2025
1. The present application is filed seeking regular bail in FIR
No. 597/2019 dated 28.09.2019, registered at Police Station
Narela Industrial Area for offences under Sections
498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC‘). The
chargesheet was filed under Sections 498A/304B/302/34 of the
IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (‘DP
Act‘).
2. Succinctly stated, the FIR in the present case was
registered pursuant to the inquest proceedings undertaken on the
basis of the complaint given by the father of the deceased/victim.
As per the complaint, the deceased/victim married the applicant
in the year 2016. It is alleged that the applicant as well as her
other family members (in-laws – father-in-law, brother-in-law,
mother-in-law) used to torture the victim to pressurise her and
BAIL APPLN. 21/2025 Page 1 of 7
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/06/2025 at 11:25:35
her family members to fulfil their dowry demand. It is alleged
that the victim was physically beaten on several occasions.
3. The victim visited the hospital on 25.09.2019 with
complaints of body ache and vertigo. She again visited the
hospital on 26.09.2019. Her condition deteriorated on 27.09.2019
and a PCR call was made from the hospital. Subsequently, her
statement was recorded by Head Constable Mukesh, stating that
she had been subjected to physical assault by her husband (the
applicant), mother-in-law, sister-in-law, brother-in-law, and
father-in-law, allegedly due to dowry demands.
4. On the following day, i.e., 28.09.2019, the deceased was
referred to BSA Hospital, where she expired during the course of
treatment. The MLC recorded the cause of death as injuries
sustained by fists and blows.
5. A post-mortem was conducted at BSA Hospital mortuary
(PM No. 905/2019), and FIR No. 597/2019 was registered at PS
Narela Industrial Area under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC and
subsequently Sections 302 of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act were added. The applicant was arrested on the
same day, i.e., 28.09.2019, and has remained in custody since.
6. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case.
7. He submits that the applicant has also been in custody
since 28.09.2019 and the trial is still at the stage of prosecution
evidence. He submits that many witnesses are yet to be examined
in the present case.
8. He submits that although the prosecution relies upon a
purported dying declaration of the deceased recorded on
27.09.2019, the said statement is riddled with contradictions. The
BAIL APPLN. 21/2025 Page 2 of 7
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/06/2025 at 11:25:35
statement alleges that the deceased was beaten on 27.09.2019 and
was taken to the hospital by PCR; however, both the prosecution
witnesses and the hospital records contradict this. The MLC of
the deceased does not reflect any external injuries, and the
deceased had in fact visited the hospital on 25th and 26th
September, 2019 without making any such complaint. Further, a
certification from the deceased’s bank allegedly suggests that the
signatures on the dying declaration do not match the account
holder’s.
9. He contends that even if the allegations in the FIR and
dying declaration are assumed to be true, the ingredients of
Section 302 of the IPC are not made out. At best, it is a case
under Section 304 of the IPC. The applicant’s wife was admitted
to hospital and remained under medical care for several days
before her demise due to cardiac arrest, as per the hospital’s
death summary. In such a scenario, the allegation of intentional
homicide is untenable. The learned counsel also places reliance
on inconsistencies in the depositions of PW-1 (brother), PW-2
(mother), and PW-3 (father) of the deceased, particularly their
admissions that there was no dowry demand or mistreatment for
nearly three years after marriage.
10. He further submits that the co-accused–namely, the
applicant’s father, mother, sister, and brother–have all been
granted regular bail.
11. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State, assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant,
vehemently opposes the bail application, submitting that the
nature of allegations is grave and serious. It is contended that the
dying declaration categorically names the applicant and his
family members as having mercilessly assaulted the deceased.
BAIL APPLN. 21/2025 Page 3 of 7
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/06/2025 at 11:25:35
12. The learned APP stress that the seriousness of the offence,
the nature of evidence available, and the possibility of
interference with the trial process strongly weigh against the
grant of bail.
13. I have heard the counsel and perused the record.
14. It is settled law that the Court, while considering the
application for grant of bail, has to keep certain factors in mind,
such as, whether there is a prima facie case or reasonable ground
to believe that the accused has committed the offence; the nature
and gravity of the accusation; severity of the punishment in the
event of conviction; the danger of the accused absconding or
fleeing if released on bail; reasonable apprehension of the
witnesses being threatened; etc.
15. In the present case, it is the prosecution’s allegation that
the applicant subjected the deceased to cruelty and physical
assault in connection with dowry demands, leading to her death.
16. The statement recorded on 27.09.2019 is being treated by
the prosecution as the dying declaration of the deceased. While
such statements carry weight, their evidentiary value must be
considered in light of corroborative material. The contention of
the learned counsel for the applicant that the ingredients of
Section 302 of the IPC are not made out and that, at best, the case
falls under Section 304 of the IPC, in the opinion of this Court,
does merit consideration.
17. It has been submitted that the deceased was under
continuous medical care for two days prior to her death, and that
she succumbed to cardiac arrest during treatment following an
operation, as per the hospital death summary. The MLC dated
27.09.2019 reportedly reflected no visible external injuries. It is
further contended that the dying declaration refers to beatings
BAIL APPLN. 21/2025 Page 4 of 7This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/06/2025 at 11:25:35
given to the deceased on 27.09.2019, and the deceased being
taken to hospital by PCR, but the evidence on record–including
depositions of key prosecution witnesses and the status report–
indicates that she had visited hospitals voluntarily on 25th and
26th September, 2019 and that the PCR was called only after her
admission.
18. While these contentions are not without substance, they
relate to issues that will ultimately be tested during trial.
Nonetheless, the material contradictions in the dying declaration,
the absence of consistent contemporaneous complaints, and the
medical record not reflecting any external injuries on 25th or
26th September, 2019 do weigh in favour of the applicant at this
stage.
19. Being conscious of the fact that individual liberty holds
immense significance, it is incumbent upon the Courts to
examine and evaluate, albeit briefly, factors such as the prima
facie case, the severity of the crime, and the accused’s likelihood
to tamper with evidence, among other considerations.
20. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that
the post-incident statements made by the family of the deceased
do not find sufficient support is significant. This Court is
conscious of the fact that while the presumption under Section
304B of the IPC exists, it is rebuttable and cannot be stretched to
override all procedural safeguards at the pre-trial stage.
Pertinently, there is no substantial complaint by the deceased, her
parents, or any other relative during her lifetime alleging
harassment or demand for dowry.
21. Importantly, the applicant has remained in custody since
28.09.2019, and the trial, despite the examination of a few
witnesses–is likely to continue for a considerable period, given
BAIL APPLN. 21/2025 Page 5 of 7
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/06/2025 at 11:25:35
the list of over 40 cited witnesses. The investigation stands
concluded, and the chargesheet has been filed. The co-accused,
including the applicant’s mother and sister, have already been
granted bail. The applicant cannot be made to undergo
incarceration for the entirety of the trial.
22. The object of jail is to secure the appearance of the
accused during the trial. The object is neither punitive nor
preventive and the deprivation of liberty has been considered as a
punishment.
23. However, appropriate conditions ought to be put to allay
the apprehension of tampering with the evidence and hampering
the witness.
24. Without commenting further on the merits of the case,
considering that the trial is likely to take some time, I am
satisfied that the applicant has established a prima facie case for
the grant of bail.
25. In view of the above, the applicant is directed to be
released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
₹20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, subject to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, on the following
conditions:
a. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make
any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with
the evidence of the case, in any manner whatsoever;
b. The applicant shall under no circumstance leave the
boundaries of the country without informing the
concerned IO/SHO;
c. The applicant shall appear before the learned Trial
BAIL APPLN. 21/2025 Page 6 of 7
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/06/2025 at 11:25:35
Court as and when directed;
d. The applicant shall provide the address where he
would be residing after his release and shall not
change the address without informing the concerned
IO/ SHO;
e. The applicant shall, upon his release, give his
mobile number to the concerned IO/SHO and shall
keep his mobile phones switched on at all times.
26. In the event of there being any FIR/ DD entry/ complaint
lodged against the applicant, it would be open to the State to seek
redressal by filing an application seeking cancellation of bail.
27. It is clarified that any observations made in the present
order are for the purpose of deciding the present bail application
and should not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be
taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
28. The bail application is allowed in the aforementioned
terms.
AMIT MAHAJAN, J
MAY 1, 2025
“SK”
BAIL APPLN. 21/2025 Page 7 of 7
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/06/2025 at 11:25:35