ASHOK MUNJAL Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Ashok Munjal seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No. 1211 dated 29.9.1998 under Section 498-A, 406 IPC. Police Station Central Faridabad. The informant Smt. Komal Munjal was married with the petitioner Ashok Munjal on 6.5.1998. After marriage she resided with the petitioner as his wife. She lodged FIR No. 1211 dated 29.9.1998 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC Police Station Central, Faridabad on the allegations, inter alia, that immediately after her marriage, her husband, the petitioner, and parents-in-law started harassing her on account of inadequate dowry and raised a demand of a sum of Rs. 50,000/-. She alleged that her married life was reduced to hell. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the allegations against him were factually incorrect. He has placed on record the document showing that the petitioner took his wife, the informant Komal Munjal for honeymoon to Hotel Padmini Niwas, at Mussoorie where they resided on 9.5.1998 to 10.5.1998. Some photographs have also been annexed with the petition which are annexures P.7, P.8, P. 9, and P.10, reflecting the gay and happy mood of the petitioner and the informant-wife. On 11.5.1998 the petitioner as well as the informant went to a Health Clinic for seeking advice regarding their personality and the documents in respect of the visit to the Health Clinic have been placed on record as Annexure P.11 and P.12. Learned Counsel for the respondent-wife on the other hand contended that as far as the photographs are concerned the gay mood reflected therein is quite natural for the newly weds. The learned Stated Counsel has also opposed the bail application and reiterated the stand of the informant.

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and going through the material placed on record the petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the anticipatory bails granted to the petitioner subject to the condition that the order of the anticipatory bail shall remain operative for a period of 90 days only. It is ordered that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. He shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any way. He shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.