Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
An Application For Anticipatory Bail ... vs In Re.: Sekendar Mirja & Ors on 27 July, 2015
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy
1 53. 27.07.2015
.
ap C.R.M. 6771 of 2015 In the matter of: an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 21.07.2015 in connection with Arambagh Women Police Station Case No. 13 of 2015 dated 10.07.2015 under Sections 498A/323/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
And
In re.: Sekendar Mirja & Ors. .... Petitioners
Mr. Niladri Sekhar Ghosh. ... for the petitioners
Mrs. Debjani Sahoo. ...for the State.
Affidavit filed by the petitioner no.1/husband be taken on record.
The petitioners, apprehending arrest in connection with Arambagh Women Police Station Case No. 13 of 2015 dated 10.07.2015 under Sections 498A/323/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, have come to this Court for anticipatory bail.
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. Perused the case diary.
The petitioner no.1 is the husband and rests are his relations. Today by filing an affidavit on behalf of the petitioner no.1, it is submitted that the allegations made in the FIR are false but he is not disputing that the de facto complainant is his legally married wife. He, therefore, offered to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.4,500/- per month for the wife without prejudice to the rights and 2 contentions of the petitioner no.1/husband. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the maintenance for this month shall be sent to the de facto complainant/wife within a week from this date and thereafter by the seventh of each succeeding month.
On the face of such submission, the learned counsel for the State submits that although she is not conceding with his claim that the allegations are false but when the petitioner no.1 has come out with an offer to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.4,500/- per month for the wife, she is not standing on the way.
Having regard to above development and considering the undertaking given by the petitioner no.1 in the form of affidavit to pay a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month as consolidated amount of maintenance for the wife, in our opinion, in this case no useful purpose will be served by taking him into custody as also his other relation who is before us and on the other hand, the justice will be sub-served if the application for anticipatory bail is allowed on the undertaking given on their behalf.
In the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer upon furnishing Bond of Rs.5,000/- each on condition that after release, they shall surrender before the regular court within two weeks thereafter. 3
This order is subject to the conditions as laid down in sub- section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
We, however, make it clear, the payment of maintenance to wife, as voluntarily offered by the husband/petitioner no.1 through his counsel, shall be in force, till any order of maintenance is made by a competent court as per the statutory provisions. We also make it clear, quantification of amount of maintenance and entitlement of maintenance by the wife, if arises for a decision before a court of law in terms of statutory provisions, such court must not be swayed by this voluntary offer of maintenance by the husband and order must be made in accordance with law.
The husband shall be obliged to pay maintenance to the wife, as voluntarily offered by him, so long no order in this regard is passed by a competent court.
However, this order is subject to the decision of the proper court on the question of maintenance in accordance with law.
We further make clear that if there is any default in making payment of maintenance, the State and the de facto complainant shall have the liberty to approach this Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.
The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. 4 Let a photostat plain copy of this order, duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court), be given to the learned Advocate for the State upon complying with necessary formalities.
(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.) (Malay Marut Banerjee, J.)