JUDGMENT :

1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

2. Apprehending their arrest in criminal case no.29542 of 2022 arising out of case crime no.1306 of 2021 under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Quarsi, District Aligarh, the applicants -Dr. Kartikeya Sharma, Ajaya Kumar Sharma and Smt. Sangeeta Sharma have moved this anticipatory bail application after submission of the charge-sheet before this Court.

3. The two anticipatory bail applications moved by the applicants have been rejected by the Court of Sessions Judge, Aligarh vide order dated 28.2.2023.

4. Heard Sri Surya Bhan Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ajay Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant/opposite party no.2 and Sri Devesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

5. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the informant Dr. Pallavi Sharma was married to applicant no.1 Dr. Kartikeya Sharma on 27.11.2015 and since after the marriage, the informant was being subjected to cruelty and harassment on account of demand of Rs.2 Crore as additional dowry and she was being mentally and physically exploited by her in-laws. Her father-in-law also used criminal force to her with intent to outrage her modesty. Accused applicant no.1 is the husband, applicant no.2 is the father-in-law and applicant no.3 is the mother-in-law of the informant/opposite party no.2. F.I.R. was lodged on 28.12.2021 and investigation started.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of their arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is further submitted that the applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2 are well educated persons and doctor by profession. No dowry demand was ever made by the applicants and the informant/opposite party no.2 was never subjected to cruelty and harassment by them. Since the opposite party no.2 was pressurizing the applicant no.1 to leave his parents, she started to live separately with applicant no.1 and his son. Both husband and wife are working as Doctor and they have very good income. The opposite party no.2 was continuously pressurizing the applicant no.1 to settle at Aligarh and to manage the Nursing Home of her father leaving his old aged parents at Ghaziabad, but when the applicant no.1 was not ready to fulfill her demand, the present F.I.R. was lodged with false facts. It is further submitted that the applicant nos. 2 & 3 are senior citizens and are suffering from the diseases of old age and are also unable even to walk properly without any support. It is further submitted that the applicants have preferred criminal misc. writ petition no.1529 of 2022 before this Court and same was disposed of in view of the scope and objective of Section 41 and 41-A Cr.P.C. in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another, (2014) 8 SCC 273. It is further submitted that in this matter, the charge-sheet has been filed under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act wherein the maximum period of imprisonment is prescribed upto seven years. Under these circumstances, the applicants deserve for grant of anticipatory bail till end of the trial.

7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposing the anticipatory bail application have submitted that during the course of investigation, sufficient evidence has been collected against the accused applicants. It is further submitted that the applicants have moved an application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. -35236 of 2022 before this Court, but the same was withdrawn and vide order dated 8.12.2022, this Court disposed of the aforesaid application as withdrawn with liberty given to them to appear before the court concerned and file appropriate application for bail. However, instead of moving bail