JUDGMENT 1. The defects pointed out by the Registry is that the FIR No.14/2022 is registered at Police Station Oshiwara, District Mumbai (Maharashtra), which is out of the jurisdiction of this Court. Indisputably, the petitioner is seeking a transit bail for a limited period so that he can be able to approach the court having the territorial jurisdiction. Thus, the defect is over-ruled. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a permanent resident of village Dujasar of District Nagaur in the State of Rajasthan. He is serving as Doctor in the Indian Army and presently deployed at Pokaran (Rajasthan). His marriage with the complainant of this case got solemnized on 01.02.2017 as per Hindu rituals. The marriage was solemnized at village Mulwas Silwa of District Bikaner. 4. Learned counsel submitted that owing to some discord of common petulance and temperamental differences, the relationship between the spouses could not continue harmonically and thus, the wife moved a petition for dissolution of the marriage under Hindu Marriage Act. The Divorce petition as well as the maintenance petition were filed at Mumbai. Since the petitioner wants to continue the marital tie, therefore, he moved a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in the court of Additional District Judge No.1, Nagaur and the same is pending adjudication. 5. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner always kept his wife in high esteem, however, since she was no more desirous to live with him, therefore, she left the matrimonial home at her own accord and now just with a view to spite, harass and bring the petitioner to her desired terms, she has lodged an FIR in the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Maharashtra. 6. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is a respectable person in the society and his arrest in this matrimonial dispute may cause incalculable harm to his reputation and his self-esteem as well as his service career would likely to be ruined on account of his unlawful arrest. 6. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is a respectable person in the society and his arrest in this matrimonial dispute may cause incalculable harm to his reputation and his self-esteem as well as his service career would likely to be ruined on account of his unlawful arrest. He further submits that although in view of the provisions contained in Sec.41 CrPC and the guiding principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Singh Vs State of Bihar: 2013 (8) SCC 273, the arrest was not imperative yet the petitioner apprehends that the Maharashtra Police, in connivance with complainant's family, may arrest him. He is desirous to approach the competent Sessions court for protection under Sec.438 CrPC yet apprehends that in the event he moves to that area, he can be arrested and therefore, a transit bail for limited period may be granted to him. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are judicial pronouncements, ruling the notion that another High Court can also grant interim protection from arrest to the petitioner till he approaches the competent court having territorial jurisdiction. Reliance is placed on Banwari Lal Kushwah Vs State of Rajasthan: 2014 (2) RLW 1849 (Raj) and Mahesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan, reported in 2005 WLC (Raj) UC 690. 8. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail. However, he too does not dispute that this Court has jurisdiction to grant protection from arrest to the accused-petitioner outside the State for a limited period. 9. Considering the over all submissions and looking to totality of the facts & circumstances of the case, more particularly the fact that the petitioner is a serving Doctor in the Indian Army, a public servant and he is made accused in a matrimonial dispute, I deem it appropriate to grant transit bail to the petitioner, for a limited period of 40 days from today. 10. 10. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner- Rameshwar Lal Suthar s/o Shri Babu Lal, in connection with the FIR No.14/2022 dated 07.01.2022 registered at Police Station Oshiwara, District Mumbai (Mahrashtra) for offence under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 506(II), 34 IPC, he shall be released on bail forthwith, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each, to the satisfaction of concerned Investigating Officer/SHO, for a period of 40 days with the following conditions: 11. It is made clear that the effect of the interim bail from arrest shall be for limited period of 40 days from today and this interim bail stand ceased automatically after 40 days. 12. Further, during the period of bail, the petitioner will not interfere with the investigation and shall cooperate in the investigation. 13. He shall not leave the Country without prior permission of the court as long as this order remains in force. 14. The petitioner may approach the appropriate court in the State of Maharashtra within the aforesaid period.