VISHAL GULATI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed by Vishal Gulati husband of Ramita (complainant).

(2.) Brief facts as derived from the FIR No. 255 dated 07.12.2011 registered at Police Station, City Ferozepur, District Ferozepur, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 and 120-B, IPC are that the marriage of the petitioner and Ramita (complainant) was solemnized on 09.02.2000 at New Delhi. The parents of Ramita were residing at Ferozepur City which was their permanent residence whereas at Preet Vihar, New Delhi, they were having temporary abode. Ring and engagement ceremonies were performed on 06.02.2000 at Ferozepur City. At that time, in addition to petitioner, Prem Nath Gulati (father-in-law), Smt. Neelam Gulati (mother-in-law), Vikas Gulati (brother-in-law/Jeth), Neha Gulati (sister-in-law/Jethani), Sarika (married sister-in-law/Nanad) and Mamta (married sister-inlaw/Nanad) were also present. In those ceremonies at Ferozepur, the parents of Ramita had given certain articles to the petitioner and his co-accused within an assurance that they would hand over all such articles to Ramita on her reaching the matrimonial home. The FIR further reveals that in the above said ceremonies held on 06.02.2000, Vishal Gulati petitioner was handed over- (i) Maruti Car 800; (ii) Gold Kara weighing five tolas; (iii) one gold chain weighing two tolas; and (iv)one diamond ring. The parents and grand-father of the complainant spent about Rs. 5,00,000/- on her marriage. A male child was born on 03.02.2001 at Delhi and on that occasion, accused Nos. 1 to 7 demanded more dowry from the parents of the complainant. In May, 2006, the petitioner and his co-accused demanded Rs. 5,00,000/- in cash and for fetching the same the complainant and the petitioner went to Ferozepur. The grand-father of the complainant gave Rs. 5,00,000/- to the petitioner in second week of May, 2006 and, thereafter, both of them came back to Noida with the said amount. About one year and nine months prior to the lodging of the present FIR, complainant came to know that the petitioner had relation with Aarti Arora daughter of Sanjiv Arora (named as accused No. 8 in the FIR). The complainant tried to make her husband understand but to no avail. Aarti Arora started coming to the house of the petitioner. The remaining accused did not pay any heed to the protest made by the complainant in that regard and ultimately the complainant was turned out of the house and she came to her parental home at Delhi. On 11.07.2010, the father of the complainant took a brotherly panchayat at the house of the petitioner and tried to make him understand and on their persuasion, the complainant restarted living with the petitioner. Again, after 5-7 days, the complainant was turned out of the matrimonial home and since then she has been living at her ancestral parental house at Ferozepur City by leaving her son at her parental home at Delhi. The jewellery and the 'stridhan' were not returned by the petitioner and his co-accused.

(3.) It was further alleged that on 08.011.2011, when the complainant was present at her ancestral house at Ferozepur City, the petitioner called her in bad names on telephone.