New Delhi, May 30, 2024 — The Delhi High Court has denied anticipatory bail to Rukhsar, an accused in a dowry death case, emphasizing the gravity of the allegations and the need for further investigation. The decision was rendered by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who heard the application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Case Background
Rukhsar, along with other family members, is accused of harassing and causing the death of her sister-in-law, who was married to Amir Khan on January 15, 2024. According to the complainant, the deceased’s mother, the family had demanded additional dowry, including a car, shortly after the marriage. The complainant alleged that the deceased was subjected to physical abuse, including beatings and electric shocks, by her in-laws, leading to her death.
Arguments Presented
Rukhsar’s counsel, Mr. Dheeraj Malhotra and Mr. Vishal Verma, argued that she had been falsely implicated and had no role in the alleged abuse or subsequent death. They emphasized that Rukhsar lived separately from the deceased and her husband and had two minor children, one of whom is less than a year old. They contended that Rukhsar should be granted anticipatory bail to care for her children.
Conversely, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), Mr. Manoj Pant, supported by Mr. Sandeep Kumar and Ms. Shivangi Sharma, argued that the allegations against Rukhsar were severe and substantiated by call detail records. The prosecution asserted that Rukhsar had physically abused the deceased and conspired with other family members to move the body to Fatehabad, Agra, without notifying the authorities.
Court’s Observations and Ruling
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma noted that the allegations against Rukhsar were corroborated by the complainant’s statements and call records. The complainant had reported that her daughter called her a day before her death, stating she was being beaten for dowry demands. Additionally, the investigation revealed that Rukhsar and other family members transported the deceased’s body from Delhi to Agra without police notification, raising further suspicion.
Given the seriousness of the allegations, the court decided that granting anticipatory bail was inappropriate. Non-bailable warrants had already been issued against Rukhsar, and the court emphasized the need for her to remain available for further investigation.
Conclusion
The anticipatory bail application was dismissed, and Rukhsar remains under legal scrutiny. The court clarified that its observations should not influence the merits of the case as it proceeds.
Note: The court’s decision underscores the importance of addressing dowry-related violence and ensuring that those accused face thorough investigations and legal consequences.
