Akhil Goyat vs State of Haryana

R.P. Nagrath, J.—Petitioner is husband of the complainant and has approached this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 558 dated 17.07.2013 registered for offences under Sections 498A, 406 and 506 IPC. Learned petitioner''s counsel vehemently contended that FIR has been registered on false and concocted story. The complainant is a hot tempered lady and has evil eye on the property of family of the petitioner. The petitioner even filed an application u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. It is further contended that the parents of petitioner have been extended benefit of pre-arrest bail and recovery of the dowry articles has also been made from them, therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. The parents of the petitioner were extended pre-arrest bail by Additional Sessions Judge on 29.07.2013 (Annexure P-2).

It is also the plea taken in paragraph No. 17 of the instant application that the complainant was having illicit affair with her boyfriend and therefore, she was never interested in the company of the petitioner. I am of the view that if this was the grouse, then filing of petition dated 06.03.2013 u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act on 06.03.2013 by the petitioner seems to be only to set up a defence. However, in that petition, there is no whisper on the character of complainant.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I find that the allegations against the petitioner are quite serious and he does not deserve the relief of pre-arrest bail.

The marriage of the complainant and the petitioner was solemnized on 05.04.2012. There are series of allegations of complainant being constantly harassed and maltreated on account of demand of more dowry despite her family having spent more than Rs. 65 lacs in the marriage. Certain material facts for disposal of this application as highlighted in the FIR may also be restated:-

... That after the ring ceremony, the complainant''s father at the instance of accused No. 2 got booked one Verna Car from Samrithi Motors Pvt. Ltd. Ambala Jagadhri Road, Ambala Cantt. on 17.02.2012 by making advance of Rs. 3,00,000/- through R.T.G.S. But the accused Nos. 1 and 3 visited the complainant''s father at his house and told that they are interested in selecting the vehicle themselves and on their request, the complainant''s father took accused No. 2 to Samta Motors Karnal and to Aaryaman Motors, G.T. Road, Karnal. In Samta Motors, Superior model of Verna was not available and thereafter the complainant''s father alongwith accused No. 2 visited Aaryaman Motors, where accused No. 2 asked for costly vehicle like Cruze, Fortuner, Audi on which the complainant''s father requested accused No. 2 that he is serviceman and is not in a position to purchase the same, on which the accused No. 2 asked the complainant''s father to pay a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- for purchase of vehicle. The complainant''s father paid a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- to accused No. 2 for purchase of Car and the advance amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- deposited with Samrithi Motors Pvt. Ltd. was withdrawn....

There are various specific instances quoted in the FIR leading to the acts of cruelty. In the FIR petitioner has been referred as accused No. 1. The other allegations in the complaint are as under:-

... That accused No. 1 had no love, affection and respect for the complainant nor he had faith in the complainant though he was satisfied in all respect regarding the virginity of the complainant on bridal night, but on 02.05.2012 in the presence of accused Nos. 2 and 3, he asked the complainant "TERA KITNO KE SATH CHAKAR HAI, KITNO KE SATH SOI, KITNI BAR SOI, TOON TO RANDI HAI. PURE GURGAON AUR DELHI KE HOTEL NAAP RAKHEY HAIN. KOI HOTEL NAHI CHHODA" on which the complainant was stunned and felt ashamed and started weeping. Thereafter, accused No. 1 had kick named the complainant "RANDI" and never called the complainant with actual name That due to physical as well as mental torture, the complainant fell ill in the end of June, 2012 and requested accused No. 1 for her treatment, but accused Nos. 2 and 3 refused to get treatment of the complainant, rather the accused No. 3 said "HAMARE PASS IN FALTU CHIJON KE LIYE PAISE NAHI HAI, AGAR ILAJ KARWANA HAI TO APNE BAAP SEY KEH, WAHI ILAJ KARWAYEGA" and accused No. 1 instead of taking the complainant to some doctor for treatment, got the complainant sit in a rickshaw and directed the rickshaw pullar to drop the complainant at her parental house and to collect the fare from the parents of the complainant. The complainant returned to her parental house on 01.07.2012 in the late evening and the complainant was taken to Virk Hospital, Karnal by her mother and brother for treatment, where the complainant was treated by Dr. Arun Gandhi and the complainant remained admitted in Virk Hospital for 3 days and all the expenses for the treatment were borne by the father of complainant. That the complainant was not only harassed, humiliated physically, mentally, sexually during the period she remained in her matrimonial home, but the accused persons are dowry seekers and used to demand cash and costly gifts in the shape of costly gift items. Accused No. 1 used to say "TERE BAAP NEY KON SI SADAK PAR GARIAN CHALWAI HAIN, KYA DIYA HAI MERE KO TO EK CRORE CASH DENEY WALE AATE THE", whereas accused No. 2 used to say "APNE GHAR SEY YAHAN AATI HAI TO HAMARE LIYE LEKAR AAYAKAR, HAMAREY LOGON MEIN TO SABUN, TEL, NAMAK, MIRCH, SUBZI, BHAAJI SAB KUCHH LADKI KE GHAR SE AATA HAI AUR PURI UMAR WAHIN SE HI AAYEGA" Accused No. 1 used to defame the complainant in the presence of his relatives and used to say "JO CHEEJ PATI KE LIYE HONI CHAHIYE, WO TO TERE PASS THI HI NAHI" and on 11.08.2012, accused No. 1 asked the complainant by putting her hand on the photo of Satya Sai Baba, "BABA KI KASAM KHA AUR BATA TERA KITNO KE SAATH CHAKAR THA, KITNO KE SAATH SOI THI, TOON BATA DE, VERNA MAIN BATATA HUN". The complainant felt ashamed badly and complained the same to accused Nos. 2 and 3 on which accused No. 3 said "KYA FARAK PARTA HAI, AGAR SHANKY (NICK NAME OF AKHIL ACCUSED No. 1) NEY TUJHE YE KEH DIYA, HUM JAMMENDAR AUR BARE AADMI HAIN, TUM CHHOTE AADMI HO, TUMHE KOI NAHI JANTA, HAMEY SAMAAJ MAIN JEENA HAI, TUMHEY SAB KUCHH HAMAREY HISAB SE KARNA PADEGA, TERE BAAP NE TO RING CEREMONY PAR SINGLE BED KEY KAMBAL DE DIYE THE, JO KISI KO PASAND NAHIN AAYE, AAB SAKRANT PER APNE BAAP SE DOUBLE BED KE KAMBAL MANGWANA, TERE BAAP NE MERA JO SONE KA SET DIYA THA, WO HALKA THA AUR DIWALI PE APNEY BAAP KO KEHNA KI MERA ACHHA SAA SONEY KA SET DEGA."

... That again, accused persons started teasing and taunting the complainant for want of dowry and on 08.02.2013, the complainant visited her matrimonial home and on the night of 9th February, 2013 after serving meal to the accused persons, the complainant was preparing for her examination to be held w.e.f. 16.02.2013, accused Nos. 1 and 3 came to the bed room and accused No. 3 snatched the book from the hand of complainant, for which the complainant objected and accused No. 1 in a fit of anger, started giving fist blow to the complainant. The complainant could not sleep on that night and on the next Monday, the complainant returned to Gurgaon for joining the classes and thereafter the complainant returned on 22nd February, 2013, but she was not allowed to enter her matrimonial house and she had to retreat to her parental home.

These are some of the incidents which have been highlighted from the FIR.

Complaint to the Police was made on 20.05.2013 and after enquiry that this FIR was registered on 17.07.2013.

Marriage of the parties was solemnized on 05.04.2012 that a situation with serious allegations has arisen in such a short time. In view of the facts of the case, I find that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of pre-arrest bail.

Dismissed.