SUMEET ZUTSHI Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-accused seeks bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No. 303/2021 registered for offences under Ss. 376/420 IPC with Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu on a written complaint lodged by the complainant-respondent No.2.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken the court through the written complaint filed by the complainant against him in order to impress upon the court that the contents of the complaint on bare reading do not make out any case under Ss. 376/420 IPC against the petitioner. The contention is that the contents of the complaint reveal that the complainant had relationship with the accused of her own will and was in the knowledge of the marital status of the petitioner at that time. The complainant was herself married when she developed relationship with the petitioner. As both the parties had marital dispute, the petitioner-accused convinced the complainant that he will marry the complainant after obtaining divorce from his wife. The complaint has been lodged after two and a half years of the first physical relationship between the complainant and the accused and it is no where mentioned that the petitioner had forcibly committed any wrong with the complainant as per the complaint is also the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the marriage between the complainant and her husband has been dissolved by mutual consent by the court of learned Additional District Judge (Matrimonial Cases), Jammu vide judgment dtd. 30/5/2020 whereas the Divorce Petition between the petitioner and his wife is still pending disposal before the court of law. The petitioner being not having been divorced legally from his wife, therefore, he cannot enter into marriage with the complainant as is submitted in the complaint that the marriage between the complainant and the accused is to take place legally. The petitioner is entitled to bail keeping in view the allegations contained in the FIR itself. The petitioner being government servant, there is no possibility of the petitioner not cooperating with the investigating agency.

(3.) Mr. Aseem Sawhney, AAG submits that the conduct of the petitioner speaks of inducing the complainant into physical relationship without having any intention to marry her.