SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mohammed Irshad vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 6 July, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

1

NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
M.Cr.C. (A). No. 98 of 2021

Mohammed Irshad S/o Mohammed Ijrail, Aged About 35 Years,
Permanent R/o -Sabri Road, Farid Nagar, Police Station -Supela Bhilai,
District -Durg (Chhattisgarh).
—- Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station –
Mahila Thana, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh).
— Respondent

For Applicant : Mr. Arvind Dubey, Advocate.
For Respondent-State : Ms. Anjali Singh Chauhan, PL.
For Objector : Ms. Reen Singh, Advocate.

(Proceedings through video conferencing)
Hon’ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, J
Order on Board
06/07/2021

Heard.

1. Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.40/2020 registered

at Police Station -Mahila Thana, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur, (CG), for

commission of the offence punishable under Section 498 A/34 of the

Indian Penal Code.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant -wife Saba Baksh

got married with the present applicant on 25.12.2011, after the marriage

applicant-husband went to his place of employment ie Sharjah, Dubai,

leaving his wife in the company of his parents at Durg. After some time ie

three months, applicant returned to India and took the complainant to

Sharjah, Dubai and started residing there. From the initial date of

marriage, applicant and his parents have started stating that the gift

articles of marriage were of low standard/quality and even the car and

Rs.15 lac cash has not been given as dowry. Applicant was being ill

treated since inception of the marriage for one reason or other. She was
2

also harassed on account of her inability to conceive a child. During the

stay of complainant at her matrimonial house in Durg, her-in-laws

removed the maid servant and they asked her to perform all the

household work. The family members of applicant have also taken her to

Doctor and have given Injections took some photographs and also stated

her that she will not be in a position to face the members of the

community. In the month of February 2020, when complainant wanted to

return to in-laws house after attending last rites ceremony of her

grandmother, she was not permitted to enter into the house, thereafter,

instant crime was registered against the applicant-husband and his

parents.

3. Shri Arvind Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant submits that

allegations levelled against the applicant and his parents are absolutely

false and baseless. It is the complainant who was not residing with the

applicant in peaceful manner. During the period of her stay with applicant

in Dubai, she has threatened the applicant of committing suicide or

implicating him in a false case. Learned counsel further submits that after

returning from Dubai, complainant came to her parental house situated in

Bilaspur and when applicant came to his house to take her back, she

refused to accompany him. Thereafter, applicant moved an application

for grant of divorce under the Muslim Law before the Family Court, Durg.

(Annexure A-2). After receipt of notice issued by the Family Court on the

application for grant of divorce complaint has been lodged against the

applicant. The allegations levelled against the present applicant in the

complaint are baseless and after thought.

4. Per contra, Ms. Anjali Singh Chauhan, the learned State Counsel

referring to the written complaint lodged by the complainant submits that
3

immediately after the marriage, parents of applicant have started stating

that the gift articles given in the marriage are of low standard/quality, if

the marriage of their son is performed in Uttar Pradesh, they would have

got Rs.15 lac cash and a Car in dowry. She also referred to some

paragraphs of complaint wherein it is mentioned that in order to harass

the complainant parents of applicant have removed the maid servant and

asked the complainant to perform all the household. She also referred to

the incident narrated that the complainant was taken to the Doctor by the

parents of applicants where Injections and Anesthesia was given to her,

due to which, she could not conceive pregnancy.

5. On putting a specific query to learned State Counsel with regard to the

date, month and year on which complainant was taken to the Doctor by

the parents of applicant for giving Injections and Anesthesia, upon going

through the copy of complaint, she replied that no specific date, month or

year has been mentioned therein.

6. Ms. Reena Singh, learned counsel for the Objector opposes the

submissions made by learned counsel for applicant and pointed out that

the affidavit submitted by applicant is a concocted documents, the

signature of applicant at two places of the deponent are different and not

the same. She further submits that from the beginning of marriage,

complainant has been harassed for one or other reason. The applicant

was having extra-marital relation with one Zahira Begum with whom he

wanted to perform marriage. She further submits that when complainant

came back from Dubai and went to her parental house to attend last rites

ceremony of her father in the Month of June, 2019 within a period of

three months from the said date applicant has filed an application for

grant of divorce before the Family Court, Durg which itself shows the
4

intention of applicant that he does not want to keep the complainant in his

company. Parents of applicant were not happy with the gift articles

brought by complainant at the time of marriage, therefore, they have

harassed her. They have also stated in front of her that if the marriage of

their son is performed in Uttar Pradesh, they could have got Rs.15 lac

cash and a Car in dowry. She further pointed out that complainant still

wants to live in company of her husband, therefore, she approached the

Sakhi Centre for counseling and notice have been issued to applicant but

he did not turn up for counseling, therefore, as a last resource, complaint

has been lodged by her.

7. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is the

applicant, who in pursuance of the order passed by this Court, came to

Bilaspur and sworn affidavit at Bilaspur, he has also signed the register of

the Oath Commissioner at Bilaspur itself.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

9. Indisputably, marriage of complainant with present applicant took place

on 25.12.2011 and after some time of marriage, she started residing with

the applicant in Sharjah, Dubai ie place of his employment. In the Month of

June, 2019, complainant alongwith the present applicant returned to India

to attend last rites ceremony of her father. Filing of application for grant of

divorce petition before the Family Court, Durg on 03.09.2019 and lodging

of complaint by the complainant against the applicant on 04.12.2020 ie

after service of notice of divorce petition on complainant have not been

disputed by the learned counsel for the Objector. The allegation of bringing

the sub standard quality of gift articles in marriage and the statement

made by the parents of applicant of Rs.15 lac cash and a Car appears to

be of the year 2011.

5

10.Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, nature of

allegation and further the fact that applicant has been granted benefit of

an Ad-interim Bail vide order dated 18.06.2021, I am inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to the applicant.

11. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of

arrest of the applicant in connection with the crime in question, he shall

be released on anticipatory bail by the officer arresting him on his

executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in

the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The applicant shall

also abide by the following conditions :

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation

before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) that the applicant 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/her from disclosing such

facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) that the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be

prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and

every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge

Jamal/-

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation