Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1949 (BOM)

Rishi Narendra Vijan v. State of Maharashtra

2014-09-05

SADHANA S.JADHAV

body2014
Judgment : 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for State. Perused the papers. 2. This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant herein is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.427 of 2014 registered at Santacruz Police Station for offence punishable under Section 498A, 406, 506, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The facts of the case are as follows : The applicant herein is married to the complainant on 19th April, 2013. The complainant is working as Branch Manager in ICICI Bank at Linking Road Branch. The couple had been to Thailand after their marriage. It is alleged that the applicant herein had not shown any interest in the complainant and that the marriage was not consummated. After marriage the complainant had been to her maternal house on 14th May, 2013. She returned to her matrimonial home on 15th June, 2013 and had stayed there upto 28th August, 2013. It is alleged by the complainant that she was made to work as a house maid by her mother-in-law and her sister-in-law. According to her, she was constrained to leave her matrimonial abode on 28th August, 2013. The applicant and his family members had learnt from reliable source that the complainant has approached the police station. The applicant had therefore, filed an application under the Right to Information Act on 6th June, 2014 to know the allegations which are levelled against him and his family members by the complainant. He received the copy of the statement dated 8th May, 2014 wherein the complainant had levelled several allegations against the applicant and his family members which would rather constitute an offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant had therefore, apprehended his arrest and had approached the Court of Sessions under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. During the pendency of the said application, an offence was registered on 15th July, 2014 as Crime No.427 of 2014. The learned Sessions Court has granted protection to the other family members of the applicant. However, the application filed by the present applicant was rejected. 4. It is a matter of record that there has been some matrimonial dispute. According to the complainant, marriage is not consummated and the same amounts to cruelty. The learned Sessions Court has granted protection to the other family members of the applicant. However, the application filed by the present applicant was rejected. 4. It is a matter of record that there has been some matrimonial dispute. According to the complainant, marriage is not consummated and the same amounts to cruelty. The complainant had abandoned her matrimonial abode in August, 2013. However, she has approached police station for the first time on 8th May, 2014. According to the complainant, her golden ornaments are in the custody of the applicant and his family members. However, it is stated in the statement of the complainant that she has taken away alongwith her most of the ornaments which were gifted to her by her parents. Be that as it may, this cannot be said to be a case for custodial interrogation. 5. Learned Counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v/s. State of Bihar and has rightly submitted that the applicant and his family members are being harassed on the basis of false allegations. In view of this, the application deserves to be allowed. 6. The observations made hereinabove are prima facie in nature and shall not be taken into consideration either for quashing of the FIR or at the trial of the present case. 7. Hence the following order : ORDER (i) The application is allowed. In the event of arrest, the applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and one or two sureties in the like amount. (ii) The applicant shall report to the concerned Investigating Officer as and when called and shall cooperate with the investigating agency. 8. The Application is disposed of on the above terms.