ASHISH HANDA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT petition has been filed by Ashish Handa -petitioner seeking pre -arrest bail in case FIR No. 14 dated February 05, 2014, under Sections 406, 498 -A IPC registered at Police Station Women Cell, Jalandhar.

(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to the instant lis are that instant case was got registered by Neha Handa on the ground that her marriage was solemnized with petitioner on June 27, 2004 and at the time of marriage her parents had incurred approximately Rs. 75,00,000/ - which included Rs. 45,00,000/ - spent on diamond ornaments weighing 200 gms and gold ornaments weighing 700 gms; besides it, 48 silver glasses and other dowry articles including colour television, Air Conditioner, Furniture, Santro Car and other valuable articles depicted and details in the list annexed with the application were given. Since, petitioner as well as his parents and other family members were not satisfied with dowry. Considering that dowry brought by her is insufficient and inadequate, they started taunting and harassing her. Even, it was also stated by them that had they performed the marriage of their son with some other girl, they could have got Lancer luxury car and cash to the tune of Rs. 20,00,000/ - as well as diamond sets for mother -in -law, sister -in -law and other members of family.

(3.) THE contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a false story has been coined by the complainant in connivance with her parents. In fact, complainant was neither maltreated nor harassed on the ground of allegedly bringing insufficient or inadequate dowry nor she was ever harassed, maltreated or beaten either by petitioner or any of his family members. The real cause is that complainant developed extra marital affairs/relation with one Bhupinder Singh @ Timmy, which fact is evident from the call details available on file as well as facebook record. When petitioner asked her to refrain from extra marital affairs, she got infuriated and got the instant case registered against petitioner and his other family members. Otherwise, there was no dispute and couple was living happily. Two daughters were also born out of their wedlock who are now in the care and custody of petitioner.