Abdul Islam and Others vs State of Chhattisgarh

L.C. Bhadoo, J.

The accused/applicants, who are husband, father-in-law, Jeth, Jetani & Nanand of the complainant, have preferred this application u/s 438 of the Cr.P.C., apprehending arrest in crime No. 303/2007 registered at Police Station Mahasamund, for offence punishable u/s 498A of the IPC.

Case of the prosecutions is that Razila Khan was married to applicant No. 1 Abdul Islam in the month of May, 2005 and there is a male child out of the wedlock. On 08.08.2007 Razila Khan lodged a written compliant in Police Station Mahasamund to the effect that just after her marriage her father-in-law, Jeth, Jetani & Nanand started instigating her husband that she has not brought motorcycle and Rs.1.00 lac in dowry. Her husband started harassing & subjecting her to cruelty for demand of dowry. Even once they left her at her parents'' house and once her parents went to meet her in-laws at her matrimonial home, there also they levelled allegations against her. The matter is under investigation. Offence has been registered u/s 498A of the IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that in the first instance harassment & cruelty was taken in May, 2005 whereas the report was lodged on 08.08.2007, which itself shows that this report has been lodged just to victimize the applicants. He further argued that when complainant Razila Khan left the matrimonial house without reasonable cause on the ground of desertion a divorce petition was field by applicant No. 1 i.e. husband of the complaint in the Court at Navapada (Orissa) on 25.07.2007, notice of the same was served on the complainant. As a counter blast this complaint was lodged on 08.08.2007. Therefore, the accused/applicants are being implicated in a false case, as such, they be extended the benefit of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having perused the case diary, considering the fact that a divorce petition has already been filed and complaint has been filed thereafter on 08.08.2007, main allegation is against applicant No. 1 i.e. husband of the complainant regarding harassment & oruetly whereas against other applicants there are general allegations that they used to instigate applicant No. 1 for harassment & cruelty by him to the complainant, I am of the opinion that as the far as applicant No. 1 husband of the complainant is concerned, it is not a fit case to extend the benefit of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. to him. Accordingly, this bail application in respect of application No. 1 Abdul Islam is rejected.

However, as far as father-in-law, Jeth, Jetani & Nanand of the complainant are concerned, it is a fit case to extend the benefit of Section 438 of the Cr. P.C. to them. Therefore, this bail application in respect of applicants No. 2 to 5 is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused/applicant No. 2, 3, 4 & 5 namely, Abdul Nawab, Abdul Salam, Shakila Begum & Ruksana Begum, respectively, if each of the accused/applicants furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with a surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, they be released on anticipatory bail with following conditions:

(i) They shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

(ii) They shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

(iii) They shall cooperate in the investigation as and when they are called.

(iv) They shall not leave State of Chhattisgarh without the previous permission of the Court.

This order shall remain in force for a period of 2 months from today. During this period, accused/applicants No. 2 to 5 may apply for regular bail.