ORDER Vishnu Sahai, J. - Heard counsel for the parties and perused the averments made in the complaint. This is an application for anticipatory bail in a case under Sections 498-A, 406, 504, 506 (2) 323 r/ws 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. The recitals in the complaint in brief are as under: The complainant - Rita Raj is serving as Assistant Commercial Manager in D.R.M.'s Office at Mumbai Central, Mumbai and the applicant who is her husband is working as Assistant Commissioner in Central Excise Department at Mumbai. While they were taking training at Nagpur, in the year 1996, they met. The applicant proposed for marriage to the complainant. The parents of both the applicant and the complainant agreed for the marriage. The applicant demanded Rs. 2 lacs as dowry. Consequently, the parents of the complainant gave him Rs. 1. 5 lacs in cash and omaments to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-. On 12-2-1997, the two were married at Lucknow. After marriage, the applicant used to tell the complainant about other girls who were his friends and the latter used to tell him not to tell her about them as they were married. On this, the applicant used to abuse and slap the complainant. In May, 1998 the complainant got posted at Mumbai and in October, 1998 the applicant was also transferred to Mumbai. The applicant used to talk with his girl - friends on phone and through Email and whenever the complainant used to protest, used to beat her. Every night, he used to come home drunk and when the complainant used to ask him the reason, he used to reply that she was not good looking; he did not like her; and he did not get anything in marriage. He used to also tell her that he had many proposals from persons who were prepared to give him dowry of Rs. 40 lacs and he repented marrying her. On 12-12-1998, the applicant came late and when the complainant questioned him, he abused her told her that her parents had not given him anything in dowry; and inflicted a very tight slap on her ear, resulting in it becoming numb. The complainant asked the applicant to take her to a doctor but, he ignored and went away. On 12-12-1998, the applicant came late and when the complainant questioned him, he abused her told her that her parents had not given him anything in dowry; and inflicted a very tight slap on her ear, resulting in it becoming numb. The complainant asked the applicant to take her to a doctor but, he ignored and went away. The complainant went to the hospital where she was medically examined (Exhibit F is a copy of the medical report and it shows that the complainant had an injury on her left ear). Thereafter, the complainant went to Lucknow and told her parents about the applicant's behaviour. After getting well, she came back to Mumbai. A few days thereafter, the applicant again started drinking, coming late, keeping contact with other girls, beating and abusing her. In June, 1999 the applicant told the complainant that he wanted to buy a car and she should get money from her parents. She refused resulting in his unleashing a volley of abuses on her. He also told her that in case he did not get the money from her parents, he would not be interested in staying with her. On 19-12-1999, in front of the complainant 's mother, the applicant asked the complainant whether the latter had got the money and when she replied in the negative, started abusing and beating her. He also threatened her that in case she did not get the money, he would kill her. Unable to bear this beastly behaviour, the complainant asked the applicant to leave her house. 3. I have perused the averments in the complaint and make no bones in observing that they prima facie make out offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 504, 506 (2) and 323 IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, against the applicant. Considering the circumstance that the applicant is an officer of the rank of Assistant Commissioner in Central Excise Department and was expected to behave with the complainant in a decent and civilised manner and be a model for others to emulate, instead treated her in a beastly manner, warrants that anticipatory bail should be refused to him. If anticipatory bail is granted to the likes of the applicant, people would loose faith in the institution of marriage and courts. If anticipatory bail is granted to the likes of the applicant, people would loose faith in the institution of marriage and courts. A feeling would gain ground in the citizenry that persons in position, like the applicant can commit the most outrageous acts and yet would be dealt softly by courts. That indeed, would be distressing. It should be borne in mind that judiciary is the last straw of hope for the common man and erosion of his faith in it would be really distressing. If faith of the common man is to be sustained in it people like the applicant should be sternly dealt with. 4. For the said reasons. I reject this application for anticipatory bail. I make it clear that the observations contained in this order are only relevant to the disposal of this application and would not influence the courts below when a regular application for bail is preferred by the applicant because considerations of a far more stringent nature weigh with the court in considering an application for anticipatory bail as against one for regular bail. Application dismissed.