: 1 :

12.aba-740-21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.740 OF 2021

1. Wasim Hashmi, &

2. Ruksar Hashmi

.... Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

.... Respondent

______

Mr. S.K. Ali, Advocate i/b. M/s. Kumar and Associates, for the

Applicants.

Smt. Sharmila S. Kaushik, APP for the Respondent-State.

Mr. Prathamesh Gaikwad, Advocate for the complainant.

______

CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE

: 17^th FEBRUARY, 2022

P.C. :

1.

The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in

connection with C.R.No.267/2020 dated 13.11.2020

registered at Mira Road Police Station under Sections 498-A,

406, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

Heard Mr. S.K. Ali, learned counsel for the

Applicants, Smt. Sharmila Kaushik, learned APP for the State

and Mr. Prathamesh Gaikwad, learned counsel for the

complainant.

1 of 5

Deshmane (PS)

PRADIPKUMAR

PRAKASHRAO

DESHMANE

Digitally signed

by

PRADIPKUMAR

PRAKASHRAO

DESHMANE

Date:

2022.02.18

14:29:51

+0530

: 2 :

12.aba-740-21.odt

3.

The FIR is lodged by the wife of applicant No.1.

Applicant No.2 is applicant No.1’s sister. The informant has

stated that she got married with applicant No.1 on 9.4.2019.

At the time of marriage, the informant’

s mother had given

ornaments and articles to the informant. Applicant No.1 has

also given some ornaments to the informant. After the

marriage, she started residing with applicant No.1’

s family

including his parents, sister Pinky, her husband Nahim

Haydar, their three daughters, applicant No.1’s other sister

Kanis, her sons, brother-in-law Yusuf and applicant No.2. On

23.4.2019, the informant and both the applicants went to

reside at Dubai. There are allegations in the FIR that both the

applicants started causing mental harassment to the informant

on the ground that she had not brought expensive articles

from her parents. In Dubai she became pregnant. She came to

Mumbai for delivery. In the FIR, there are allegations that

after coming to Mumbai she was harassed by the applicant’

s

father and other sisters. The informant used to inform

applicant No.1 but he did not support her, and instead, used to

2 of 5

: 3 :

12.aba-740-21.odt

threaten her. The FIR mentions various disputes between the

informant and the applicant’

s other family members. There

are allegations that the applicant’

s father on one occasion had

beaten her. There were continuous quarrels. She was not

allowed to take out the passport for her newly born baby. On

one occasion, the informant lodged an N.C. complaint against

the applicants’ other family members. Since then she started

residing separately with her parents and then finally lodged

her FIR.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that

the allegations in the FIR are false and fabricated. The

ornaments are already returned to the informant. The

applicants’ custodial interrogation is not necessary. Both of

them are residing in Dubai.

5.

Learned counsel for the intervenor opposed this

application based on the contents of the FIR.

6.

Learned APP has also opposed this application.

She submitted that applicant No.1 has attended the police

station and has cooperated with the investigation. Applicant

3 of 5

: 4 :

12.aba-740-21.odt

No.2 has only attended the police but did not meet the

investigating officer. She submitted that since both of them

are stationed in Dubai, anticipatory bail should not be granted

to them.

7.

I have considered these submissions. In the entire

FIR, there are only vague allegations against the present

applicants. There are allegations that in Dubai when the

informant stayed for a few months, she was harassed on the

ground that she had not brought sufficient articles from her

parents. These allegations are made belatedly. When she came

back to India, she did not make grievance to anybody.

8.

Rest of the allegations in