The Delhi High Court granted a dowry death accused 15 days’ interim bail so he could secure his daughter’s school admission. The Court also made it clear that it would not entertain any request to extend the interim bail.
The Delhi High Court granted 15 days’ interim bail to an accused in a dowry death case to help him secure his daughter’s school admission. Justice Girish Kathpalia passed the order on April 20, 2026, in Rihan Khan @ Dulare v. State of NCT of Delhi, BAIL APPLN. 1260/2026 and CRL.M.A. 9895/2026.
The case arises from FIR No. 309/2022 registered at Police Station Khajuri Khas. The FIR invokes Sections 498A, 304B, 120B, 313 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code, along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The accused moved the Delhi High Court for interim bail. He said he needed temporary release to secure his daughter’s school admission. Pursuant to an earlier order, the State filed a status report.
In its status report, the State said that the applicant’s daughter was living with her grandparents, aged 57 and 45. It also stated that the applicant’s parents and brothers were engaged in a business that earned around Rs. 20,000 per month. On that basis, the prosecution argued that no case for interim bail was made out.
However, appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Zeeshan Diwan disputed the State’s stand. He argued that the statements annexed to the status report presented a different picture. According to him, one statement showed that the accused’s father had said that he and his wife worked as labourers in the factory concerned. Further, another statement also described the accused’s parents as labourers.
During the hearing, the father of the accused appeared in person before the Court. He stated that he was self-employed and did not work as a labourer in any factory.
The Court noted that the dispute over the family’s work status was not the central issue. Instead, it said the main purpose of the interim bail plea was to enable the applicant to secure his daughter’s admission to school.
The Court also recorded the father’s statement that the admission process would take no more than 10 to 15 days. In addition, he informed the Court that schools had already opened admissions.
Meanwhile, learned APP Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal appeared for the State along with SI Shubham, Inspector Devi Lal and Inspector Uttam. On instructions from the Investigating Officer, he told the Court that the State had no serious objection to the grant of interim bail. At the same time, he submitted that the accused should not seek to keep extending that liberty indefinitely.
After considering the submissions, the Court allowed the application. It directed the release of the accused on interim bail for 15 days from the date of release.
The Court made the relief subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 and one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. It granted the relief so that the accused could secure his daughter’s school admission.
Finally, the Court made it clear that it would not entertain any request to extend the interim bail. It also disposed of the accompanying application.
