CRM M-3695 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CRM M-3695 of 2014 Date of Decision: May 27 , 2014 Parshant Sharma …..Petitioner versus State of Haryana …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI.
-.- Present:- Mr.P.S.Hundal, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Dinesh Trehan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.S.K.Hooda, Addl.A.G., Haryana.
Mr.R.L.Batta, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Geeta Sharma, Advocate M.M.S.BEDI, J.
The petitioner seeks the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of his wife Hema Sharma alleging that the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the petitioner on 15.4.2007.
There are serious allegation of physical and mental cruelty against the petitioner.
As per the allegations in the FIR, the complainant was harassed for bringing less dowry and for having given birth to a girl child.
It is apparent from the FIR that she has filed a petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C.for maintenance besides availing remedy u/s12 of the Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act.
Mann Tapindar Singh The complainant seems to have also filed a complaint against 2014.05.29 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM M-3695 of 2014 2 the petitioner and his family members in the National Commission for Women, New Delhi, alleging demand of dowry and harassment.
The petitioner is a registered Medical Surgeon, tripple post graduate in Opthalmology with super specialization in Vitreo Retinal.
It is alleged that the petitioner is alcoholic and abusive.
All her jewellery articles are with the in-laws at Saket, New Delhi.
The family members of the petitioner have supported him for his violent behaviour towards the complainant and the minor daughter.
The complainant had stayed with the petitioner at Jalandhar but he had always maltreated and humiliated her.
Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner and the complainant had left for aborad for two days after the marriage and left the jewellary in a locker.
On coming to India on December 21, 2008, they had opened the locker on January 2, 2009.
The petitioner had left India on January 5, 2009.
The complainant wife had taken out all the jewellary articles before going to UK.
Strong reliance has been placed on ex-parte order of divorce granting preliminary/ final decree of divorce.
Mr.P.S.Hundal, Sr.Advocate has vehemently urged that UK Court has held that the behaviour of the complainant was such that it was not possible to stay with her.
Besides this, he has argued that the petitioner has been discharging all the liabilities towards the child i.e.bearing expenses of half of amount.
He has even offered to pay a cheque for the recent expenses pertaining to the child for daily needs.
On the other hand, Mr.R.L.Batta, learned senior counsel for the complainant has argued that the entire dowry articles and istri dhan of the complainant are lying with the petitioner and that the petitioner has Mann Tapindar Singh 2014.05.29 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM M-3695 of 2014 3 played fraud with the UK Court by obtaining an ex-parte decree of divorce on false grounds to the effect that the complainant is not mentally well whereas she is an expert eye surgeon performing her duties.
He has also argued that amount due under the orders passed by the Court exercising powers pertaining to the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the orders passed by the Magistrate under Section 125 Cr.P.C.has not been paid till date.
He claims that on the basis of said grounds, the petitioner is not entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail.
He also stated that an application for setting aside the ex-parte decree of divorce has been filed in the UK Court and is still pending.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
The complainant, present in the court, has explained that she is an expert Opthalmologit.
She has been termed as insane person by her husband and was compelled to leave UK for India, where she has been abandoned by her in-laws by misappropriating her dowry articles.
The petitioner appears to have made best efforts possible to get rid of the complainant by seeking an ex-parte decree of divorce from UK court, which has not become final as she is taking steps to get the ex-parte decree set aside.
The petitioner , on the basis of ex-parte decree of UK Court, commenting upon the behaviour of the complainant, cannot claim that he is justified to abandon the complainant in violation of his matrimonial obligation.
There are serious allegations of physical and mental cruelty, demand of dowry and misappropriation of dowry and jewellery articles.
Merely because the petitioner has been compelled to discharge the liability to maintain the child, born out of the wedlock, is not Mann Tapindar Singh 2014.05.29 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM M-3695 of 2014 4 sufficient enough to grant him the concession of pre-arrest bail.
In view of serious allegations of cruelty and demand of dowry and misappropriation of dowry articles, I do not find any extra ordinary exceptional circumstances to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
Dismissed.
May 27 , 2014 (M.M.S.BEDI) TSM JUDGE Mann Tapindar Singh 2014.05.29 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh