SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vijay Gupta vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 16 November, 2018

Criminal Misc. No. M-15094 of 2016 (OM) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No. M-15094 of 2016 (OM)
Date of decision : November 16, 2018

Vijay Gupta
….Petitioner
versus

State of Punjab and another
….Respondents

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh

Present : Mr. AS Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner

Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Sr. DAG, Punjab for the State

Mr. Arif Qureshi, Advocate, for the complainant

Fateh Deep Singh, J. (Oral)

This order shall dispose of anticipatory bail filed under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in case bearing FIR No. 20 dated

23.4.2016 under Sections 498A/506 IPC and subsequently added Section

406 IPC on 9.6.2016 and Sections 420,465,467,468,471 IPC on 2.11.2016,

pertaining to Police Station Women, Bathinda, got lodged by wife

complainant Rekha Jindal.

The precise allegations brought to the notice of the Court

during the course of submissions are that the present case was got registered

1 of 3
29-12-2018 14:38:50 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-15094 of 2016 (OM) -2-

on the complaint of wife Rekha Jindal wherein she alleged that she was

married on 25.4.2012 with petitioner accused Vijay Gupta. It is alleged that

at the time of marriage huge gold ornaments and other costly articles were

given and her Ishtridhan was handed over to the accused who refused to

return back the same and rather she was subjected to harassment and cruelty

for demand of more dowry leading to the registration of the present case.

Mr. AS Ahluwalia, counsel for the petitioner has submitted

that the present FIR is a counter blast to the allegations of the husband

whereby he has sought divorce from the wife and that the allegations of

physical abuse and demand of dowry were fabricated with an ulterior

motive and neither any specific allegation of cruelty much less specific

entrustment of articles of Ishtridhan and criminal breach of trust are made

out.

On behalf of the State assisted by counsel for the complainant,

the same is sought to be opposed on the grounds that the petitioner happens

to be the husband and principal accused with whom after the marriage the

complainant was residing and invariably the articles of Ishtridhan were

lying with him in his possession and having usurped the same and who

managed to fabricate certain documents necessitates his custodial

interrogation disentitling him to any relief.

Appreciating the arguments put forth by the two sides, it is not

in any manner put to dispute that the marriage between the couple took

place on 25.4.2012 and the FIR has been lodged on 23.4.2016. There are

2 of 3
29-12-2018 14:38:51 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-15094 of 2016 (OM) -3-

specific allegations of handing over of Ishtridhan to the husband, his

demand for more dowry articles as well as physical abuse and mental

cruelty. Though as is evident that the husband has sought to set off

accusation of having committed criminal offence by invoking the complaint

against the wife and thus, apparently to thwart the applicability of having

misappropriated the articles of Ishtridhan. Recovery of the articles of

Ishtridhan as per the submissions of the learned State counsel still needs to

be made together with the offences for which the petitioner has been hauled

up necessitates his custodial interrogation. Provisions of Section 438

Cr.P.C. are to be sparingly used especially it is not a deserving case for

sympathetic consideration of such a relief for the petitioner. The petition

being hopelessly without merits stands dismissed.

( Fateh Deep Singh )
November 16, 2018 Judge
‘tiwana’

Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No
Whether Reportable ? Yes/No

3 of 3
29-12-2018 14:38:51 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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