1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3821 OF 2009

1. Ajaykumar S/o.Sumermal Chordia,

Age-44 years, Occu-Business,

R/o.Jaisingpur, Tq.Shirol,

Dist. Kolapur,

2. Sumermal S/o.Laxmichand Chordia,

Age-75 years, Occu-Business,

R/o.as above.

3. Harshkumar H.Manoth,

Age-55 years, Occu-Business,

R/o.Dilsukh Nagar, Near Jain Mandir,

Hyderabad (A.P.)

4. Kawarlal Champalal Nahar,

Age-45 years, Occu-Business,

R/o.Bhagwan Mahavir Road,

Marwadi Galli, Shenur, Dist.Raichur

(Karnataka State)

5. Sau.Surekha Kawarlal Nahar,

Age-42 years, Occu-Household,

R/o.As above

APPLICANTS

VERSUS

1. The State of Maharashtra

2. Sau.Kanchan Ajaykumar Chordia,

Age-36 years, Occu-Household,

R/o.Jaysingpur, Tq.Shirol, Dist.Kolhapur,

At present, R/o.Kingcorner,

Station Road, Parbhani.

RESPONDENTS

2

Mr.A.S.Barlota, learned counsel for applicants.

Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for respondent no.1

Mr.Vijay Sharma, learned counsel for respondent no.2

(CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.)

RESERVED ON : 22/01/2010

PRONOUNCED ON : 29/01/2010

J U D G M E N T :

1.

By the present application u/s. 482 of The Cr.P.C., the

applicants have approached this court for issuance of directions that

the FIR of Crime No.149/2009, registered in Nanalpeth Police Station

of Dist. Parbhani and the further proceedings lodged on the basis of

said FIR at the instance of respondent no.2 be quashed and set aside

and to release the first applicant on anticipatory bail in the event of

his arrest in connection with the said crime.

2.

Rule.

3.

Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally at the stage of

admission by consent.

4.

Such of the facts which are necessary to consider the rival

submissions of the applicants and respondents across the bar, can

be summarized as follows :

a) It is not under dispute that the marriage of 2^nd respondent

took place with the first applicant on 18/02/1991. The couple have

two children by name Hitesh and Ruchika. Since the marriage, the

3

couple is residing at Jaysingpur, Tal.Shirol, Dist. Kolhapur.

b) It is alleged that somehwhere in the year 2005, the first

applicant has filed a divorce petition bearing HMP No.25/2005 in the

Court of Civil Judge, S.D. Jaysingpur, which came to be withdrawn

on assurance given by the 2^nd respondent and her family members

that the 2^nd respondent will behave properly.

c) It further appears that the alleged incident of demand of

dowry, not to provide food to the 2^nd respondent, to tease her that she

is mentally disordered and without intimating to her parents and her

brothers, she was to be admitted in the Government Ladies Hostel, at

Kolhapur, known as Government Tejaswini Ladies Hostel, which

incident took place somewhere on 23/08/2009 at Jaysingpur,

Tal.Shirol, Dist. Kolhapur, from where the 2^nd respondent gave

contact number of her father and brother to the Supdt. Of the Ladies

Hostel as the first applicant husband refused to take her back. Her

parents came at Kolhapur and took her back to Parbhani where she

lodged this complaint about the alleged incident with the Inspector of

Police, Nanalpeth Police Station, Parbhani. On the basis of said

complaint, CR No.149/2009 came to be registered against the

applicants.

5.

Hence, the present application filed by the applicants for the

grounds stated in para no.7(i) to (xiii) to the application.

6.

In this background, heard learned counsel appearing for the

applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP for State, and

learned counsel appearing for original complainant. Also perused

4

the complaint lodged by the 2^nd respondent.

7.

Even though the application is filed for the grounds stated in

para no.7(i) to (xiii), during the course of submissions, much stress

was given mainly on two grounds, i.e. that after going through the

complaint, as it is, entire cause