Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Samunder Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Samunder Singh vs State of Rajasthan and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Supreme Court of India Decided Jan 12, 1987
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/651944

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Supreme Court of India
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 1987
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Penal Code - Section 302 and Criminal Procedure Code--Section 438--Anticipatory bail--High Court should not exercise its jurisdiction granting anticipatory in dowry death cases in disregard of magnitude and seriousness of matter.;Appeal Dismissed - - 1. The widespread belief that dowry deaths are even now treated ...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Samunder Singh

Advocate Gopal Subramaniam,; A.M. Garg and; R. Venkatramani, Advs.

Respondent

State of Rajasthan and ors.

Advocate Dalveer Bhandari, Adv.

Legal References

Reported In
1987(35)BLJR276a; 1987CriLJ705; II(1990)DMC586SC; 1987(1)SCALE66; (1987)1SCC466; [1987]1SCR979; 1987(1)WLN256

Court's Analysis

Prior History
From the Judgment and Order dated April 11, 1985 of the Delhi High Court in Crl. A. No. 169 of 1982--

Excerpt

penal code - section 302 and criminal procedure code--section 438--anticipatory bail--high court should not exercise its jurisdiction granting anticipatory in dowry death cases in disregard of magnitude and seriousness of matter.;appeal dismissed - - 1. the widespread belief that dowry deaths are even now treated with some casualness at all levels seems to be well grounded.m.p. thakkar, j.1. the widespread belief that dowry deaths are even now treated with some casualness at all levels seems to be well grounded. the high court has granted anticipatory bail in such a matter. we are of the opinion that the high court should not have exercised its jurisdiction to release the accused on anticipatory bail in disregard of the magnitude and seriousness of the matter. the matter regarding the unnatural death of the daughter-in-law at the house of her father-in-law was still under investigation and the appropriate course to adopt was to allow the concerned magistrate to deal with the same on the basis of the material before the court at the point of time of their arrest in case they were arrested. it was neither prudent nor proper for the high court to have granted anticipatory bail which order was very likely to occasion prejudice by its very nature and timing. we therefore consider it essential to sound a serious note of caution for future. the high court is under no compulsion to exercise its jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail in a matter of this nature. so far as the present matter is concerned, since it has become infructuous, we do not propose to pass any order. subject to these observations, the appeal is dismissed.

Full Judgment

M.P. Thakkar, J.

1. The widespread belief that dowry deaths are even now treated with some casualness at all levels seems to be well grounded. The High Court has granted anticipatory bail in such a matter. We are of the opinion that the High Court should not have exercised its jurisdiction to release the accused on anticipatory bail in disregard of the magnitude and seriousness of the matter. The matter regarding the unnatural death of the daughter-in-law at the house of her father-in-law was still under investigation and the appropriate course to adopt was to allow the concerned Magistrate to deal with the same on the basis of the material before the Court at the point of time of their arrest in case they were arrested. It was neither prudent nor proper for the High Court to have granted anticipatory bail which order was very likely to occasion prejudice by its very nature and timing. We therefore consider it essential to sound a serious note of caution for future. The High Court is under no compulsion to exercise its jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail in a matter of this nature. So far as the present matter is concerned, since it has become infructuous, we do not propose to pass any order. Subject to these observations, the appeal is dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial