Zeeshan Ali @ Zeeshaan Ali v. …
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.2250 of 2023 ------ Zeeshan Ali @ Zeeshaan Ali .... Versus .... …. Petitioner 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Dr. Shakereen Tauhidi @ Shakereen Tauheedi .... .... .... Opposite Parties With A.B.A. No.2273 of 2023 ------ 1. Md. Fareed 2. Anjum Ara .... Versus .... …. Petitioners 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Dr. Shakereen Tauhidi @ Shakereen Tauheedi .... .... .... Opposite Parties ------ CORAM
Legal Reasoning
: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioners For the State For the O.P. No.2 ------ : Mr. Md. Nasim Akhtar, Advocate : Ms. Anuradha Sahay, Addl.P.P. Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, Advocate : Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Advocate Ms. Rishi Bharti, Advocate Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, Advocate ------ Order No.07 Dated- 06/09/2023 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Chas Mahila P.S. Case No.01 of 2023 registered under Section 498-A, 506, 504, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner of A.B.A. No.2250 of 2023 being the husband of the opposite party No.2 and the petitioners of A.B.A. No.2273 of 2023 respectively being the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the opposite party No.2, treated the opposite party No.2 with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry and at the time of marriage on 21.03.2022 at the instance of the petitioners of the aforesaid two cases, the parents of the informant/opposite party No.2 paid Rs.5,50,000/- to the petitioner No.2 of A.B.A. No.2273 of 2023 namely Anjum Ara, by transferring the said amount, in her bank account with HDFC Bank, Patna Branch and apart from that gold and silver jewellery of Rs.10,00,000/- were also taken. Besides the above house-hold articles and clothes worth Rs.2,50,000/- were also given to the informant; as per the demands of the three petitioners. After marriage when the informant/opposite party No.2 reached her in-laws house, the mother- in-law of the informant/opposite party No.2 namely Anjum Ara taunted her for bringing less dowry. She was upset as money was not given for Sherwani of the husband of the informant/opposite party No.2. On the first day itself the mother-in-law of the informant/opposite party No.2 did not allow the door of the room of the informant/opposite party No.2 to be closed and the husband of the informant/opposite party No.2 did not establish physical relationship with her. On the next day of reception on 25.03.2022 the husband of the informant/opposite party No.2 dropped her at her paternal house and came only after one month on 25.04.2022 to take the informant/opposite party No.2. Though he stayed with her but did not establish any physical relationship with her and put mental pressure upon the informant to give him more money as ‘Edi’ and when the informant refused to give money, her husband abused her and threatened her that he will leave her alone without taking her with him. Because of the same, the father of the informant/opposite party No.2 was forced to pay Rs.1,00,000/-. When the informant/opposite party No.2 reached her matrimonial house again her husband and mother-in-law taunted her for bringing less dowry and mentally tortured her. They told her that they are getting heavy amount of dowry and there is offer of a flat also, from other girls for solemnising marriage with the husband of the informant. On 06.05.2022 though the informant/opposite party No.2 went to Manali for honeymoon with her husband still her husband did not establish any physical relationship with her. When they returned from Manali, the mother-in-law of the informant/opposite party No.2 put her bed in the room of the informant/opposite party No.2 and started sleeping there. When the same was opposed by the informant/opposite party No.2, they abused the informant/opposite party No.2 to be a shameless and characterless lady and mentally tortured her. On 22.05.2022 at the instance of the mother-in-law of the informant/opposite party No.2, her husband forcibly took her to her maternal house and dropped her there but continued quarrelling with her over phone and her mother-in-law was threatening her. On 28.07.2022 when the informant/opposite party No.2 again came to her matrimonial house, her mother-in-law did not allow her to go near her husband and on 30.07.2022, her husband went to Hyderabad leaving her with her mother-in-law and thereafter they mentally tortured her for bringing Rs.20,00,000/- from her parents. The mother-in-law of the informant/opposite party No.2 was not allowing her to take her jewelleries to anywhere and in the absence of the informant/opposite party No.2 they took away some of the jewelleries of the informant/opposite party No.2̣. On 14.08.2022, the informant/opposite party No.2 went with her mother-in-law to the place of work of her husband at Hyderabad but the mental and physical torture continued there also. Day- by-day the torture was enhanced. On one occasion when the informant/opposite party No.2 was cooking food her mother-in-law and her husband opened the second and third burner of the gas stove but the informant immediately closed the same and protested but they threatened her of dire consequences. When the informant/opposite party No.2 used to discuss about the physical weakness of her husband and was suggesting for treatment, her husband and mother-in-law became enraged and were abusing her by calling her to be a shameless and characterless lady and were threatening to get the second marriage of the husband of the informant/opposite party No.2 solemnized with another lady. Her mother- in-law and husband used to call her ‘Kothewali’. The mental pressure was of such a nature that the same drove the informant/opposite party No.2 to commit suicide. Even though the informant/opposite party No.2 is a doctor by profession still she thought of committing suicide several times but did not do so because of her father and mother. The informant/opposite party No.2 shared her thoughts with her husband but her husband did not co- operate with her. On 05.11.2022, her mother-in-law and husband went to Patna leaving the informant/opposite party No.2 with her old father-in-law namely Md. Fareed at Hyderabad and the father-in-law also mentally tortured the informant/opposite party No.2 and even though he was knowing pretty well that the informant/opposite party No.2 cannot resist the smell of fish and in spite of her telling not to do so her father-in-law used to bring fish and forcibly making the informant/opposite party No.2 cook the same. In the meantime the informant/opposite party No.2 became ill and requested her husband to come back but he did not come to Hyderabad. When she told this to her father and mother they called her to Bokaro. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to keep and maintain the opposite party No.2 with full honour and dignity. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State being assisted by the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submit that the petitioners have no respect for law and they have taken huge amount of money but their greed having been not satiated with the said money and even though the informant/opposite party No.2 is herself a Doctor by profession still they went on torturing the informant/opposite party No.2 to satisfy their greed of further money and even went upon pushing the informant/opposite party No.2 to commit suicide by their inhuman conduct of perpetrating severe mental and physical torture. It is next submitted that keeping in view the fact that huge amount of money and jewelries have been taken by the petitioners; their custodial interrogation is required during the investigation of the case to recover the same and to find out the details of the case. It is then submitted that keeping in view the conduct of the petitioners; which shows that they have no respect for the law and can stoop to any low to satisfy their lust for dowry, there is every chance of the petitioners tampering with evidence as also absconding. It is therefore submitted that the petitioners ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and the requirement of their custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case as well as the chance of their tampering with evidence and absconding, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/