DATTATRAY SUBHASH KHOMNE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant apprehending arrest in Crime No.42 of 2020, registered with MIDC Waluj Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad for the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, has preferred this application seeking pre-arrest bail.

(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned APP. Perused the order dated 28.02.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, rejecting the application of the applicant and allowing the application filed by co-accused i.e. accused Nos. 2 to 4.

(3.) In brief, it is contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the complaint filed is false, frivolous and filed after due deliberation. It is submitted that as per version of the incident given in the FIR, the informant alleged to have been driven out from the house of the applicant on 02.10.2019. The complaint has been filed on 23.01.2020. The allegations made in the complaint are vague and general in nature. The marriage between the applicant and the informant was solemnized in the year 2012. There was not a single complaint against the applicant during the intervening period of 7-8 years of marriage. It is further submitted that the applicant is serving in KEM Hospital, Pune. He has no past record of indulging into criminal activities. The arrest of the applicant would spoil his entire life and service career. It is further submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required.