Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail of In-laws in Dowry Death Case from Rajasthan.


07 October 2025 Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law   |   Dowry death >> Criminal Law  

The Supreme Court of India has set aside the Rajasthan High Court order of anticipatory bail to the in-laws of a woman who is accused of having died because of harassment to demand dowry. The order was passed on October 7, 2025, by a bench consisting of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti, in Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 12071/2025, Kirodi Meena vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Appellant Kirodi Meena is the father of the deceased female who succumbed to death in her matrimonial household under mysterious conditions. The death was attributed to the persistent harassment and cruelty on dowry demands. The appellant further argued that the victim's body was cremated in haste without notification to her parental household, which further added to suspicion about the circumstances of her death.


 

 

The High Court of Rajasthan had previously granted anticipatory bail to respondents Girraj and Ajay alias Gabdu, the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, whom the Supreme Court held to be unwarranted. Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat, on behalf of the appellant, submitted that there was undue haste exercised by the High Court in the matter of granting bail when the respondents had been in custody for merely seven months and there was considerable material against them. He also emphasized that hasty cremation without the knowledge of the relatives of the deceased was a serious and incriminating factor.

In support of the appellant's position, the State of Rajasthan counsel maintained that the stage of the case and the evidence available were not conducive to the granting of bail to the accused. The opposite argument was presented by counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, with the argument that the dowry demand charges were unfounded and that the death of the deceased was connected rather to her husband's alleged extramarital affair, in which the in-laws had no involvement.

Following both parties, the Supreme Court held that the High Court had no reason to grant bail to the respondents. The bench noted that the conduct of the accused in going ahead with the cremation, given that none of the relatives of the deceased were around, indicated suspicious behavior and reasoning as a consideration as an indicator of their potential implication. The Court made it clear that the ultimate finding of guilt would be based on the evidence led in the current trial.

Accordingly, the Apex Court granted the appeal, quashed the February 10, 2025, order of the High Court, and directed the respondents to surrender before the concerned court within a week. It also ordered the trial court to conduct the trial promptly, preferably within a year.

The order disposes of all pending applications connected with the matter.