SHAIKH MAJID Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Inspite of service, respondent No. 2 Smt. Tabbasumebgum is absent.

(2.) Respondent No. 2 had married to applicant No. 1 Shaikh Majid on 22.11.2010. Out of wedlock, a female child is delivered. The matrimonial relations between applicant No. 1 and respondent No. 2, did not keep well. She has left company of applicant No. 1. Applicant No. 1 had caused notice through Kazi on 4.7.2012, to join him but she did not join. She has approached the Women Redressal Forum on 23.7.2012. Applicant Nos. 2 to 6 are in laws, while applicant No. 7 Tabrej is distant relative of applicant No. 1.

(3.) We have perused the statements of witnesses. They are in general character and ill-treatment on account of demand for opening garage or carrying garage activities are attributed. Independent persons have not come forward to substantiate the grievance of respondent No. 2. Babakhan is a neighbour of her father. He attended some conversations of Hafiz Bhai in a hotel with his two friends. Such statement, will not be attributable for the offence punishable under section 498-A of I.P.C. Shaikh Kadir has attended the marriage to demonstrate that valuable items used for domestic purpose, including gold ornaments, were given in the marriage. He has intervened the controversy between the couple. He says that one day in the evening Hafiz Bhai, his wife, son and daughter have expelled respondent No. 2.