SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vijaykumar Nandlal Kukreja And … vs The State Of Maharashtra on 26 October, 2018

1 of 6 906.ABA.2179.2018.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2179 OF 2018

1. Vijaykumar Nandlal Kukreja,
Age 34 years,
2. Nandlal Pessuram Kukreja,
Age 60 years,
3. Smt.Jasota Nandlal Kukreja,
Age 58 years,
4. Chello Nandlal, Age 35 years,
5. Mrs.Maahi Chello Kukreja, Age 32 years,
All R/o.Pee Jay, Block No.A-701/1402,
Hirapuri Chowk, Behind Netaji School,
Ulhas Nagar-421 005. Applicants
versus
The State of Maharashtra Respondent

Mr.Ashok M. Saraogi for applicants.
Ms.A.A.Takalkar, APP, for State.
Mr.Avinash Kaldate, Police Inspector and A.V.Jadhav, Ulhas Nagar
Police Station, present.

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

DATE : 26th October 2018
PC :

1. This is an application for anticipatory bail in connection with
CR No.I-219 of 2018 registered with Central Police Station, Ulhas
Nagar for offences under Section 498A, 354, 406, 500, 501, 504,
506, 509 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code read with Sections 66,
66(e) and 67 of Information Technology Act. The FIR was registered
on 31-7-2018.

2. The prosecution case is that the marriage between the
complainant and the applicant no.1 was solemnized on 12-11-2017.

::: Uploaded on – 01/11/2018 01/11/2018 23:36:01 :::

2 of 6 906.ABA.2179.2018.doc

The applicant no.1 is the husband of complainant. The applicant
nos.2 and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the
complainant, whereas, applicant no.4 is the brother-in-law and
applicant no.5 is wife of applicant no.4. It is alleged that since 7-1-
2018 the complainant is residing with her parents. She is working in
State Bank. She was subjected to harassment. In the marriage the
complainant’s father had given ornaments valued at about Rs.12.60
lakh. The accused started demanding ornaments. The complainant
was given several ornaments as stri-dhan. The conduct of the
accused was objectionable. The brother-in-law of the complainant
had outraged her modesty. The wife of brother-in-law abused her
and separated her husband. The accused no.1 (applicant no.1) had
clicked her photographs. The applicant no.1 had forwarded several
messages which wee defamatory. The messages were forwarded by
forming a whats app group of which the applicant no.1 was the
administrator and the persons to whom the messages were
forwarded, an impression was given that the complainant is having
relationship with another person. The messages were circulated
amongst members of meditation group. The FIR was lodged for the
aforesaid offence on 31-7-2018. The applicants prefer application
for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court which has been
rejected as far as applicants are concerned and two persons were
granted anticipatory bail.

3. Learned counsel for applicants submitted that the version of
the applicant in complaint is concocted. There are no previous
complaints. The allegations are vague. The date of incident of
outraging modesty is not specified in the FIR. The complainant had
left for matrimonial home on 31-7-2018. It is further submitted that

::: Uploaded on – 01/11/2018 01/11/2018 23:36:01 :::
3 of 6 906.ABA.2179.2018.doc

prior to registration of the FIR, the applicants had lodged complaint
with police on 23-5-2018 and 30-5-2018. It is submitted that on 24-
6-2018 NC complaint was lodged at the instance of applicants with
police. It is submitted that the relationship between the applicants
and the complainant was cordial at the initial stage which is borne
out by the photographs which are annexed to the application.
However, the conduct of the complainant was objectionable and on
account of her acquaintance with third person, there were disputes
between the parties. The applicant nos.2 and 3 are senior citizens
and they are ailing. The entire family has been dragged into the
criminal prosecution. Merely on account of forwarding the
messages, the applicants cannot be subjected to custody. He has
relied upon the photographs and call details as well as chats of the
complainant with the third person. It is submitted that during
pendency of the application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions
Court, interim protection was granted to them and they have co-
operated with the investigating officer. It is submitted that the
applicant no.1 is willing to deposit the amount without prejudice to
their rights and contentions to the extent of value of ornaments
which are allegedly retained by accused no.1 (applicant no.1). It is
further submitted that the applicant no.1 had offered to surrender
his cell phone which was not accepted by the investigating officer.
The matter relates to matrimonial discord and custodial
interrogation of the applicants is not necessary.

4. Learned APP submitted that serious role is attributed to the
applicants. The complainant was continuously subjected to
harassment. The accused had also indulged in outraging modesty of
the complainant. The complainant’s father has spent huge amount

::: Uploaded on – 01/11/2018 01/11/2018 23:36:01 :::
4 of 6 906.ABA.2179.2018.doc

on ornaments which were given to the complainant. The recovery of
property is yet to be made. The applicants did not co-operate with
the investigation. During the course of investigation evidence is
collected by police which shows the complicity of applicants. It is
submitted that prior to registration of FIR, the complainant had
forwarded written complaint. The statements of witnesses indicate
that the applicant no.1 had forwarded several whats app messages
and objectionable photographs. The statements of witnesses
recorded during the investigation supports the case of complainant.
It is further submitted that the applicant no.1 did not hand over his
cell phone although he was requisitioned to do so. It is not simple
case of matrimonial discord. The nature of allegations is required to
be taken into consideration. It is thus prayed that the application
may be rejected.

5. I have perused the FIR, documents annexed to this application
and investigation papers pointed out by learned APP. The marriage
of applicant no.1 and the complainant was solemnized as stated
above on 12-11-2017. Admittedly there were disputes between the
parties within the short span of time. The complainant was
subjected to harassment as alleged in the FIR. It is alleged that on
one day the father-in-law and brother-in-law had outraged her
modesty. The brother-in-law had repeated the said act again. He
was supported by his wife and other persons of family. It is further
alleged that the conduct of accused no.1 was highly objectionable.
the father-in-law and brother-in-law were trying to frequently touch
her inappropriately. The FIR also indicate that the ornaments to the
tune of Rs.12.60 lakh were retained by the accused. According to
the prosecution, the said articles are yet to be recovered. During the

::: Uploaded on – 01/11/2018 01/11/2018 23:36:01 :::
5 of 6 906.ABA.2179.2018.doc

course of investigation statements of several witnesses were
recorded. The applicant no.1 had posted several whats app messages
which were objectionable in nature. The same were circulated
amongst whats app group. According to the complainant, the said
act has caused mental disturbance to her. The messages were sent
repeatedly maligning her character. The applicant nos.2 and 3 are
the father-in-law and mother-in-law and applicant no.4 is brother-in-
law and applicant no.5 is wife of applicant no.4. In the FIR although
it is alleged that applicant no.2 and applicant no.4 had committed
act amounting to outraging her modesty, the FIR does not specify
the date of incident. There is no previous complaint with regards to
the said allegation. Primarily serious allegations are attributed to
applicant no.1. The prosecution intends to recover property.
Looking into the nature of allegations and the evidence corrected by
prosecution, case of grant of anticipatory bail to applicant no.1 is not
made out. However, for the reasons stated above, applicant nos.2 to
5 can be granted protection u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. The property as
alleged can be recovered by custodial interrogation of applicant no.1
and the custody of other accused is not necessary. Investigation
conducted by police corroborates the complaint vis-a-vis role played
by the applicant no.1.

6. Hence, I pass following order :

ORDER

(i) Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No.2179 of 2018 as far
as applicant no.1 is concerned, is rejected;

(ii) Applicant nos.2 to 5 are granted bail; and in the event of arrest
of applicant nos.2 to 5 in connection with CR No. I-219 of 2018

::: Uploaded on – 01/11/2018 01/11/2018 23:36:01 :::
6 of 6 906.ABA.2179.2018.doc

registered with Central Police Station, Ulhas Nagar, they be released
on bail on furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each with
one or more sureties in the like amount;

(iii) The applicant nos.2 to 5 shall report the investigating officer of
Central Police Station, Ulhas Nagar as and when called for;

(iv) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence;

(v) Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No.2179 of 2018 is
disposed off with above directions.

7. At this stage learned counsel for applicants states that
applicant no.1 would consider approaching higher Court challenging
this order and seeking relief u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. It is submitted that
applicant no.1 was granted interim protection by the Sessions Court
and hence applicant no.1 be protected from arrest for a period of
three weeks. Taking into consideration the submission, the applicant
no.1 may not be arrested for a period of three weeks from today.

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
MST

::: Uploaded on – 01/11/2018 01/11/2018 23:36:01 :::

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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