Full Judgment
A.K. Srivastava, J.
(1) This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail is moved on behalf of Manish Aggarwal, the husband of the complainant; Inder Sain Aggarwal, father-in-law of the complainant, Smt. Krishna Aggarwal, mother-in-law of the complainant and Ashish Aggarwal, a minor brother-in-law of the complainant aged about 15 years. The offences alleged are under Sections 498-A/406/341PC.
(2) The undisputed facts, as have emerged from the contents of the petition, oral arguments and documents shown, appear to be that the petitioner No. I married the complainant on 20.5.94; that from 21.2.95 the complainant is staying with her parents; that the petitioner No. I filed a suit for divorce on 25.3.95 in which die respondent-complainant moved a petition for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act on 3.5.95 and that the Fir in question i.e. No. 182/95 was registered at the police station on 3.6.95.
(3) The petitioners moved before the Sessions Judge for grant of anticipatory bail and on 6.6.95 the Additional Sessions Judge passed an interim order of no arrest till the next date i.e. 4.7.95. In the order there is a mention of the petitioners' Counsel; statement that the petitioners would return all the undisputed items and that they shall see the 1.0., Si Balbir Singh on 8.6.95 at 5 p.m. On 4.7.95 the learned Additional Sessions Judge adjourned the hearing to 2.8.95. In that order, it is observed that some articles have been returned while others are still to be recovered. Interim order was directed to continue till the next date. On 2.8.95 the anticipatory bail petition was dismissed. From this dismissal order it would appear that the application was opposed on the ground that articles worth Rs. 5 lacs were yet to be recovered and that another case under Section 307 Indian Penal Code had been admittedly registered against the petitioners. The defense of the petitioners in that case was that the complainant had herself attempted to commit suicide.
(4) It is interesting to note that on 11.7.95 itself, much prior to 2.8.95 the day on which the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the petitioners' application for anticipatory bail, the petitioners 1, 2 and 3 had already got an order of anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case under Sections 307/34 Indian Penal Code against them.
(5) It would appear that the aforesaid Fir under Sections 307/34 Indian Penal Code was lodged on 4.7.95 relating to an incident which had taken place some time in February 1995. From the medical bills it transpires that the medical treatment was given during the period 15th February, 1995 to 21st February, 1995. The case of the petitioners is that all the payments relating to the medical treatment bills were borne by the husband and his family members. On this point no dispute was raised from die side of the State.
(6) There is also no dispute on the point that the petitioners joined in the investigation as and when were called for.
(7) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners as also the State. At the very outset it may be said that so far as petitioner No. 4 is concerned there is no opposition from the side of the State considering the fact that he is only 15 years old. Coming to the rest petitioners i.e. petitioners 1 to 3, from the contents of the petition the other facts and circumstances of the case and the undisputed documents shown, it would be clear that the parties were already in civil matrimonial dispute before filing of the Fir on 3.6.95 and that no specific allegation relating to the alleged offence under Section 307 Indian Penal Code were made till that date. On the over all picture as stands at the present, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. No doubt, challan or final report has not yet been filed but the petitioners have already joined the investigation and there is nothing on the record to indicate that the investigation is going to be affected if the petitioners remain enlarged.
(8) Resultantly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond each in the sum of Rs. 10,000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 1.0. /arresting officer. However, the petitioners shall join investigation as and when required by the 1.0. by way of written requisition.