TAHMEENA KALEEM Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners A9 to A12 are seeking anticipatory bail for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498 A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act read with 34 IPC.

(2.) The defacto complainant Mrs. Syeda Saba was married to Mohammed Bin Issaq-A1 on 5.9.2011. She alleges that at the time of her marriage, her father gave 40 tulas of gold and Rs.10.00 lakhs as dowry. After the marriage, her husband and in-laws treated her well for few days and thereafter started harassing her demanding to bring additional dowry. It is also her case that she visited her parent's house but she did not disclose the harassment meted out by her husband and in-laws. She further alleges that her father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law insisted her to take divorce from her husband so that they would perform second marriage to her husband and get more dowry. She alleges that her husband and the abovereferred accused forcibly sent her out of her house in the month of August, 2013 demanding her to bring Rs.5.00 lakhs from her parents. According to her, she informed her father about the demand and her father arranged Rs.2.00 lakhs. She again alleges that for some days her in-laws were happy, but again started harassing her and this time the parents of her mother-in-law namely Syed Kaleemulla Hussain and his wife, Bipasha alongwith their other relatives, Tahmina Kaleem and Razziuddain started visiting their house and advised her husband and in-laws that if she (defacto complainant) is sent out of their house they would bring a rich girl for her husband. Again, she alleges that two more sisters of her husband namely Manal Ishaq, resident of Australia, and Mona Ishaq, resident of Jeddah encouraged her husband and in-laws over phone and they called her on phone and abused and threatened her with dire consequences if she fails to oblige them. She further alleges that her another sister-in-law-Madiha and her husband-Md. Sharif also harassed her on petty issues. She says that she informed her father who tried to pacify the matter and she convinced her parents. She alleges that on 29.10.2013, her husband alongwith her in-laws and their relatives held meeting in their house and necked her from their house demanding to bring Rs.10.00 lakhs additional dowry.

(3.) In case between Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand the Apex Court observed as follows: