HC Opines: Order of bail in anticipation of arrest cannot be granted to be used as a shield, Read Judgment

The Single Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Akshay Dhingra vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi consisting of Justice Amit Mahajan while dealing with a bail application, held that only because a complaint of the wife about stridhanis pending, does not mean that the husband can be allowed to surreptitiously throw the wife out of the matrimonial house and take away the articles.

Facts and Procedural History:

This petition was filed for a grant of pre-arrest bail in an FIR u/s 380 of IPC registered at police station K.N. Katju Marg, Rohini. 

The FIR was registered on a complaint made by Mrs. Ashka Kholi alleging that the household articles were stolen while she was away from her house. The parties had been litigating and to pressurise the complainant, the applicant surreptitiously, in the absence of the complainant, surrendered the flat to the landlord. The house was the matrimonial home and the complainant, in this manner, could not have been thrown out of the house.

Contentions Made:

Applicant: It was contended that the applicant was married to the complainant and the FIR was registered due to matrimonial discord. It was also contended that the parties were litigating and the house from where the articles were alleged to be stolen was taken on rent by the applicant. Moreover, the complainant, on her own, had left that house. The applicant was left with no other option but to surrender the tenancy of the house and the articles were removed.

Observations of the Court:

The Bench noted that even though the applicant was the husband of the complainant, the law does not permit even the husband to take the household articles including the jewellery in such a manner:

“No person can be allowed to take the law into his own hands with an excuse that the parties are litigating. Only because a complaint of wife in relation to stridhan is pending, does not mean that the husband can be allowed to surreptitiously throw the wife out of the matrimonial house and take away the articles.”

It also noted that the investigation was at a nascent stage and the accused had not joined the investigation. The articles were yet to be recovered.  In the facts of this case, it could not be said at this stage that the allegations made were frivolous or were only made with the object to injure or humiliate the applicant by having him arrested.

The decision of the Court:

This Court found no reason to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant and the same was, accordingly, dismissed. It was, however, made clear that any observations made in this order were only for deciding this application and should not influence the outcome of the trial.

Case: Akshay Dhingra vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Coram: Justice Amit Mahajan

Case No: Bail Application 3754/2022, decided on 30^th December 2022

Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. V. Aggarwal.

Advocates for Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP for the State along with Inspector Dinesh Kumar, P.S. KNK Marg. Mr. Rajiv Bajaj, Adv. for complainant.

Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com