Bombay High Court
Shumail Muhammed Sohel Ahmed Karari vs The State Of Maharashtra on 15 January, 2024
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
Gokhale 1 of 4 23-aba-101-24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 101 OF 2024
Shumail Muhammed Sohel Ahmed Karari ..Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents
_____
Mr. Amol Joshi a/w. Umesh Kumar for Applicant.
Ms. Pallavi N. Dabholkar, APP for State/Respondent.
_____
CORAM :- SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE :- 15 JANUARY 2024
P.C. :-
1. The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection
with C.R.No. 203 of 2023 registered with Kharghar Police Station,
Navi Mumbai, on 12.06.2023, under Sections 498-A, 406 and 504
r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The F.I.R. is lodged by the wife of the present applicant
on 12.06.2023. She has stated in her F.I.R. that, she got married
with the applicant on 30.12.2020. After the marriage, the
applicant told her that the marriage was against his wish. The
::: Uploaded on - 17/01/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2024 11:14:30 :::
2 of 4 23-aba-101-24
applicant's parents illtreated her on the ground that sufficient
expenditure was not made during wedding and the ornaments
were not given. It is alleged that the applicant was having
relationship with another lady before their marriage. He therefore,
used to illtreat the informant. Since April 2022 she left her
matrimonial house and started residing with her parents. Her
ornaments and the documents were not given to her. On this basis
the F.I.R. is lodged.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant fairly states that the
first informant was heard when the applicant's anticipatory bail
application was decided by the Court of Session.
4. Considering this statement, it is necessary that the
informant is made a party in this application. I have considered the
learned counsel's submissions for ad-interim relief. Learned
counsel invited my attention to the decree of divorce passed by the
Family Court at Bandra vide Judgment dated 16.02.2023. The
marriage was dissolved by the decree U/s.28 of the Special
Marriage Act, 1954. It was a divorce by mutual consent when even
::: Uploaded on - 17/01/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2024 11:14:30 :::
3 of 4 23-aba-101-24
the first informant had supported the prayer for divorce. It was
mentioned in the decree that the parties had stated on oath that
there was no dispute about giving or taking of streedhan articles.
Learned counsel submitted that, after this decree was passed on
16.02.2023, this F.I.R. was lodged in June 2023. In any case, since
April 2022 the parties are residing separately and there are no
specific instances inviting application of Section 498-A of the I.P.C.
He submitted that the informant is now disputing the decree of
divorce, however, it was passed after following due process of law.
5. Considering these submissions, today I am adjourning
the application with ad-interim protection to the applicant.
6. Hence, the following order.
ORDER
i) Learned counsel for the applicant shall add the
first informant as a party respondent.
ii) Amendment shall be carried out forthwith.
iii) Issue notice to the added respondent, returnable
on 22.02.2024.
4 of 4 23-aba-101-24
iv) In the event of his arrest in connection with
C.R.No. 203 of 2023 registered with Kharghar
Police Station, Navi Mumbai, till the next date,
the Applicant be released on bail on his executing
P. R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees
Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties
in the like amount.
v) This order shall operate till 22/02/2024.
vi) Stand over to 22/02/2024.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
