AARIFUDDIN SHAHBUDDIN PATHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is taken up final hearing. Even in the fourth round, Mr.H.A.Shah, learned advocate for the respondent is absent.

(2.) THE facts of the present case are that the applicant is the elder brother in -law of the complainant. The marriage of the complainant had taken place with Ejajkhan. Initial period of 3 years of her marriage life, she lived happily with her in -laws and there was no dispute between them.

(3.) HAVING heard Mr.H.S.Soni, learned APP appearing for the State and going through the record, it appears that it is an admitted position of the fact that Aarifuddin Shahbuddin Pathan was abroad during the period when these allegations are made against him. While referring to page 17, looking to his passport and looking to his visa and the averments in the complaint also, he is brother in -law of the complainant wife and the averments made in the complaint do not disclose any offence against this accused under 498 -A IPC. Provision of Section 498 -A of IPC reads as follows :