Introduction
In dowry-related cases, dying declarations often name multiple family members — sometimes with specific allegations, and sometimes in vague and omnibus terms. The distinction between the two is critical when it comes to pre-arrest bail. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, in MCRC No. 127 of 2026, examined whether an elderly father-in-law named in a dying declaration — but without any specific role attributed to him — could be denied anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, particularly when a co-accused had already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench
Background of the Case
In Misc. Criminal Case No. 127 of 2026, the applicant — Dilraj Singh — approached the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur seeking anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR bearing Crime No. 409/2025 registered at Police Station Churhata, District Rewa, Madhya Pradesh.
The offences alleged against him were under:
- Section 85 of BNS 2023 — Cruelty by husband or his relatives
- Section 80(2) of BNS 2023 — Abetment of suicide
- Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act — Giving or taking dowry
This was the first anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant before the High Court.
Facts of the Case
As per the prosecution’s case, the deceased — daughter-in-law of the applicant — consumed poison and died by suicide. Before her death, she left behind a dying declaration in which she named several accused persons, including the applicant Dilraj Singh, alleging cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry.
The applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased, aged approximately 70 years.
Submissions on Behalf of the Applicant
Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant advanced the following key arguments before the Court:
1. Omnibus and General Allegations A careful reading of the dying declaration itself revealed that the primary and specific allegations were directed against the mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased. The allegations against the applicant — the father-in-law — were vague, general, and omnibus in nature, without any specific role being attributed to him.
2. Age and Background of the Applicant The applicant, being approximately 70 years of age, was argued to be an elderly person with no active role in the alleged cruelty or harassment.
3. Parity with Co-Accused It was brought to the Court’s attention that Kanti Singh, the mother-in-law of the deceased and a co-accused in the same FIR, had already been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of the same High Court vide order dated 26 December 2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 55678/2025. The grant of bail to the co-accused was urged as a relevant factor in favour of the applicant.
State’s Opposition
The learned Panel Lawyer for the State of Madhya Pradesh opposed the application, contending that as a member of the household and one of the in-laws of the deceased, the applicant shared equal responsibility for her well-being. It was further argued that the fact that co-accused Kanti Singh was granted bail on account of being a woman could not automatically become a ground for granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant.
The Court’s Decision
Hon’ble Justice Ramkumar Choubey, after considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and perusing the relevant portions of the case diary, and taking note of the fact that the co-accused had already been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench, was inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
The application was accordingly allowed, with the following directions:
- In the event of arrest, the applicant Dilraj Singh shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer or Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station
- The applicant shall strictly abide by all conditions enumerated under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023
- The MCRC stands allowed and disposed of
The order was expressly passed without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
Legal Significance of This Order
This order touches upon several important principles of criminal law that are frequently encountered in dowry-related cases and anticipatory bail jurisprudence:
① Omnibus Allegations Do Not Automatically Justify Arrest One of the most significant aspects of this order is the Court’s implicit recognition that where a dying declaration primarily attributes specific acts to certain accused persons, the remaining named accused cannot be treated identically solely on the basis of their family relationship. Vague and general allegations without any specific overt act attributed to an accused have consistently been treated with caution by Indian courts.
② Parity Among Co-Accused as a Relevant Consideration The fact that Kanti Singh — a co-accused in the same FIR — had already been granted anticipatory bail was treated as a relevant and material consideration. Courts in India have recognized the principle of parity, holding that when similarly placed co-accused have been granted bail, denial to another accused without distinguishing circumstances may be difficult to justify.
③ Age of the Accused as a Relevant Factor The applicant’s advanced age of approximately 70 years was a factor noted by the Court. Advanced age, particularly in the absence of any specific allegations of active participation in the alleged offences, is a recognized consideration in bail jurisprudence.
④ Anticipatory Bail Under Section 482 BNSS — The New Framework Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is the provision governing anticipatory bail under the new criminal law framework, replacing Section 438 of the CrPC. Section 482(2) lays down specific conditions that every person released on anticipatory bail must comply with, and the Court’s direction to abide by these conditions reflects the statutory mandate.
⑤ Dying Declaration — Not Conclusive Against All Named Accused While a dying declaration is admissible and can form the sole basis of conviction under Indian law, courts have also held that the evidentiary weight of a dying declaration must be assessed carefully, particularly when allegations therein are directed differently against different accused persons. This order reflects that nuanced approach.
Relevant Legal Provisions
| Provision | Subject |
|---|---|
| Section 482, BNSS 2023 | Anticipatory Bail |
| Section 482(2), BNSS 2023 | Conditions for Anticipatory Bail |
| Section 85, BNS 2023 | Cruelty by Husband or Relatives |
| Section 80(2), BNS 2023 | Abetment of Suicide |
| Sections 3 & 4, Dowry Prohibition Act | Prohibition of Giving/Taking Dowry |
Conclusion
The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s order in Dilraj Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (MCRC 127/2026) is an instructive precedent on how courts approach anticipatory bail applications in dowry death cases where the allegations in the dying declaration are general and omnibus against certain accused persons. It reinforces the principle that personal liberty cannot be curtailed merely on the basis of family relationship with the primary accused, without specific and credible allegations establishing the role of the person seeking bail. The order also highlights the growing significance of parity arguments in bail matters under the new BNSS framework.
