SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(P&H) 840

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
M.L. Singhal, J.
Sanjay and others - Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondent
Criminal Misc. No. 5786-M of 1996.
Decided On : 20 May, 1996

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Ms. Gopi Chand, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Ms. Charu Bansal with Mr. J.S. Yadav, Advocates.

In cases of dowry demand, harassment, and assault, the court will consider the credibility of the allegations and the evidence supporting them in determining whether to grant pre-arrest bail to the accused.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL LAW - DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961 - SECTION 3, 4 - PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES ACT, 1989 - SECTION 3(1)(x) - DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005 - SECTION 3, 18 - INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 - SECTION 498-A, 406, 354, 323, 506, 34 - PRE-ARREST BAIL - WIFE'S COMPLAINT OF DOWRY DEMAND, HARASSMENT, AND ASSAULT - HUSBAND AND FATHER-IN-LAW DENYING ALLEGATIONS AND CLAIMING WIFE'S INFIDELITY - COURT FINDS NO GROUNDS FOR PRE-ARREST BAIL FOR HUSBAND AND FATHER-IN-LAW, BUT GRANTS IT TO MOTHER-IN-LAW.

Fact of the Case:

Anuradha, a married woman, filed a complaint against her husband Sanjay, father-in-law Bhim Singh, and mother-in-law Banarsi Devi under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including dowry demand, harassment, assault, and criminal intimidation. She alleged that her in-laws demanded a Maruti car as dowry and subjected her to physical and mental torture. The husband and father-in-law denied the allegations and claimed that the wife was having an extramarital affair and was trying to pressurize them to withdraw a divorce petition filed by the husband.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the allegations made by the wife were credible and that there was sufficient evidence to support the charges against the husband and father-in-law. The court also noted that the husband had filed a petition for divorce against the wife, which indicated that the marriage was on the rocks.

Issues: 1. Whether the allegations of dowry demand, harassment, and assault made by the wife were credible and supported by evidence. 2. Whether the husband and father-in-law were entitled to pre-arrest bail.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the allegations made by the wife were credible and that there was sufficient evidence to support the charges against the husband and father-in-law. The court relied on the wife's testimony, as well as the statements of witnesses who had seen the wife being harassed and assaulted. 2. The court held that the husband and father-in-law were not entitled to pre-arrest bail. The court found that the allegations against them were serious and that there was a likelihood that they would abscond if released on bail.

Final Decision: The court declined the pre-arrest bail application of the husband and father-in-law, but granted it to the mother-in-law on the condition that she furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 5000/-.


JUDGMENT

M.L. Singhal, J. - Heard.

Mrs. Anuradha d/o Nand Ram was married to Sanjay s/o Bhim Singh on 1.5.1993 according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies. After marriage, her father- in-law Bhim Singh, husband Sanjay and mother-in-law Banarsi Devi expressed that she had not brought adequate dowry in marriage. They started laying demands upon her for Maruti car. With a view that she brought Maruti car from her parents, they started harassing and taunting her. On 2.5.1993, when she came to house of her in-laws at Rewari, her mother-in-law Banarsi Devi taunted her that such a marriage was performed by persons of no means. Her father-in-law taunted her saying that his son had been sold for a song. Her mother-in-law placed all the items of dowry i.e. jewellery etc. in the Almirah. She locked that Almirah and did not allow her to touch her dowryitems. She was taunted, harassed and tortured all the while. In the beginning, she tolerated their taunts, harassment and maltreatment in the hope that with the lapse of time, things would emerge better. She thought if there was winter, spring was not far behind. They, however, did not change their treatment towards her. She narrated the entire sequence of events to her mother on 22.9.1994. On 23.9.1994, Sarvshri Hukam Singh etc. went to the house of her in-laws to advise them not to harass, taunt and maltreat her on the issue of dowry. They visited them again on 23.12.1994 to advise them to shun maltreatment of her and not rake up the issue of dowry. On 4.5.1995 at about 5.00 p.m. she was taken in his arms by her father-in-law from her back with the intention to outrage her modesty. She brought the incident to the notice of her mother-in-law and husband. They calmed her saying that if she told this incident to anyone, the consequence for her would be bad. On 5.5.1995, she was threatened by them to bring money from, them for the purchase of Maruti car or else bring new Maruti car from her father. If she did not bring money for the purchase of new Maruti car, she would be done to death and nobody would have inkling as to where she had evaporated. Her father under the force of circumstances, sent them a new double bed on 15.5.1995 so as to appease them. On 5.6.1995, S/Shri Hukam Singh etc. went to them for advising them not to maltreat/beat her. They also enquired as to what was the incident in which her father-in-law was figuring. They were assured that they would not lay any demand in future and give her proper treatment. They would permit her to use dowry articles. On this assurance, she was sent to her in-laws. On 21.6.1995, in the evening her father-in-law Bhim Singh again caught hold her with the intention to outrage her modesty. At that time, he was drunk. She brought this incident to the notice of her husband and mother-in-law. Her mother-in-law instigated her husband who gave her beating and rebuked her. On 22.6.1995, her maternal uncle Shiv Dayal and brother Manoj went to them. They were also abused. Finding that the atmosphere in the house of her in-laws was not congenial for her to stay there, she left the house of her in-laws and went to her parents house with wearing apparel only. On 27.6.1995, she made a report at Police Station, City, Rewari. On 4.7.1995 her husband and father- in-law apologized in the midst of Gajraj etc. and swore written affidavit. Taking their assurance at their face value, she came to the house of her in-laws, but she was again beaten up and they repeated their demand for dowry. Her husband ran after her with danda in his hand. She ran to the house of Gajraj Singh, neighbour for safty. She reported the matter to the police on 29.1.1996. Finding inaction on the part of the police, she instituted complaint in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari under Sections 498-A, 406, 354, 323, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari ordered the police to investigate this complaint. Police investigated this complaint and reg








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top