Judgment: M.K. Mudgal, J. 1. Case diary is not available however, the facts in detail of the occurrence are mentioned in order dated 29/04/2014 passed by the Court of First Additional Session Judge, Raisen in bail application No. 234/2014. 2. This is first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., filed by the applicants for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with crime No. 291/2014, registered at Police Station-Mandideep, District-Raisen, for the offence punishable under Section 498A, 323, 506B/34 of IPC & Section3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case, they have not committed any offence as alleged by the complainant Rajni who lodged the report on 13/04/2014 at Police Station-Mandideep where her relative Mangal Singh is posted as Sub-Inspector. Learned counsel further pleads that applicant no. 1 Devidas is the father-in-law, applicant no. 2 Vanso Bai, Mother-in-law and applicant no. 3 Ku. Ranjana Sister-in-law, of the complainant who were residing at Rahul Nagar, Mandideep separately from the complainant who was residing along with her husband in the rented house of Maharaj Singh. The allegations levelled are totally false and concocted. On the aforesaid facts, learned counsel has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for respondent-State opposing the submissions made on behalf of the applicant has prayed for rejection of the anticipatory bail application. 5. Heard arguments of both the parties. 6. On perusal of the order dated 29/04/2014, it is evident that as per prosecution story complainant Rajni was married in year 2012 to Purushottam Aurdh, the respondent no. 4 two years before lodging the report on 13/4/2013, she had been residing with her husband at Mandideep in the house belonging to Maharaj Singh two months before 13/4/2014. It is further alleged that complainant's in-laws used to harass and oppress her with persistent demand for different kind of vehicles like Motor Cycle, Washing Machine and accuse her for bringing with her meager dowry. It was against this back ground that the father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law came to her Mandideep's house and quarreling with her violently beat and they also threatened her to set her on fire by pouring kerosine oil on her whereupon she fled away from Mandideep house, thereafter report was lodged. 7. It was against this back ground that the father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law came to her Mandideep's house and quarreling with her violently beat and they also threatened her to set her on fire by pouring kerosine oil on her whereupon she fled away from Mandideep house, thereafter report was lodged. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts that when the complainant was living in her in-laws' house, she never had any occasion to lodge any complaint against the applicants and she lodged the report to the Police two months after living separately from them. The circumstance casts a shadow of suspicion on the authenticity of the alleged allegations. 8. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Preeti Gupta and another v. State of Jharkhand and another (2010) 7 SCC 667 has taken note of growing tendency of filing of complaints which are not bona fide and filed with oblique motive and observed as under:- 30. It is a matter of common knowledge that unfortunately matrimonial litigation is rapidly increasing in our country. All the Courts in our country including this Court are flooded with matrimonial cases. This clearly demonstrates discontent and unrest in the family life of a large number of people of the society. 31. The Courts are receiving a large number of these complaints under Section498A of the Penal Code...... xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 32. It is a matter of common experience that most of these complaints under section 498A IPC filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations. We come across a large number of such complaints which are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive. At the same time, rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry harassment is also a matter of serious concern. 9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it fit case to grant anticipatory bail, therefore, allowing the application, it is ordered that in the event of arrest by the arresting officer or by Court, the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with one surety for the like amount each to the satisfaction of arresting officer. 10. The applicants are directed to join the investigation immediately and fully co-operate with the investigation. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with one surety for the like amount each to the satisfaction of arresting officer. 10. The applicants are directed to join the investigation immediately and fully co-operate with the investigation. They shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 11. Certified copy as per rules.