Anticipatory bail granted in taunting and Talking sarcastically to daughter-in-law is normal in married life


C.R. NO.152 OF 2020

1. Ramesh Sitaldas Dalal  Applicants.
Aged: 80 years.
2. Malavicka Ramesh Dalal
Aged: 75 years.


The State of Maharashtra ] Respondent.
(At the instance of Malabar Hill Police
Station, Mumbai, vide C.R. No.152/2020.)
Zia Deepak Dalal ] Intervener.
Ms. Anandi Fernandis a/w Ms. Namita, Advocate for Applicants.
Mrs. Geeta Sharma, APP for the Respondent/State.
Mr. Faisal F. Shaikh, Advocate for the Intervener/Orig. Complainant.

CORAM : H.H. The Addl. Sessions Judge Mrs. M.A. Baraliya
The Designated Judge under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

CR NO. : 18
DATED : 16th December, 2020.


Apprehending arrest in Crime No.152/2020 registered by Malabar Hill Police Station, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 406, 323 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as ‘IPC’), applicants have preferred the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred as ‘Cr.P.C.’) seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Present applicants are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the first informant. Husband has not preferred application for any relief as he stays at Dubai. While considering the facts alleged by the wife against her in-laws and husband in her FIR dt. 26.09.2020, there is no need to consider the allegations made against her husband as he is not party to the present application.

3. According to first informant -30 years old woman, she and her husband, both were acquainted with each other since their school time. Her husband without asking her anything, proposed marriage of both to her mother for which first informant was not ready. Anyhow though she was reluctant, their marriage was fixed and solemnized on dt. 28.05.2018. According to her report, before some days of marriage, during the process of furnishing documents to the office of Registrar of Marriage, for registering marriage, she and her parents realized that her husband is the adopted son of the applicants. They for that purpose inquired with one lady namely Bela and it was realized that one Kailashpati is the biological mother of her husband. Said Kailsah Pati is the domestic maid in the house of her in-laws. According to her report, in the betrothal ceremony, her in-laws gave her gold ornaments to wear only. After the function they obtained the ornaments given to her for wearing. Her husband was gifted with the gold chain weighing 100 grams. The marriage was solemnized at the Oberoi Trident hotel. Her in-laws didn’t gift her anything. However, her parents gifted her the valuable gold and diamond ornaments worth Rs.1,51,50,000/-. According to her allegations, after the marriage she came to stay at her matrimonial home with the applicants. However, from the very first day her mother-in-law began to harass her, asking her to sleep in living room. She would use to pull of her blanket entering into her bedroom. Mother-in-law wouldn’t allow to touch the fridge and would give her stale food to eat. Her father-in-law has an evil eye towards her. She was not allowed to go to her mother’s home. She has made several allegations against her husband, who sarcastically would say her to obey her parents. According to her, several times she visited Dubai and again returned to Mumbai. Number of allegations are made against the husband including that he didn’t keep physical relationship with her and demand of valuables by him. She has quoted one incident dt. 11.09.2018 and according to it, while returning from Dubai to Mumbai, her husband handed over her dry fruits weighing 15 kg. She went to the applicant’s home to deliver those dry fruits and at that time, mother-in-law assured its weight before accepting the delivery. According to her, her in-laws would say her that they are citizens of Dubai and have a residential flat there. She has also given the list of the ornaments gifted by her parents and by her in-laws in the marriage.

4. Learned Advocate appearing for applicant has submitted that the accounts of the applicants have already been frozen by the Investigating Agency. Her submission is that first informant was knowing since beginning that her husband is the adopted son of the applicants since she frequently visited their house even before marriage when both were in affair. According to her, it is the love marriage. According to her the expenditure of the marriage was equally borne by both sides. She has submitted that for very few, hardly for 10 days, informant stayed with the applicants. Only for twice she visited matrimonial home. First on 11.09.2018 and later on, on 09.12.2018. She used to visit Dubai to her husband’s home and on returning she would stay to her mother’s home. According to her, the alleged jewellery is not in custody of the applicants. The police never served them summons. They came to know about the FIR when they received the notice of freezing their accounts. Her submission is that applicants are old aged and suffering from several ailments. Applicant no.1 is heart patient and applicant no.2 is a diabetic patient. Husband has already initiated divorce proceeding at Dubai. So she is harassing unnecessarily both applicants. She has also submitted that while returning from Dubai to Mumbai on 02.12.2019, she has returned with all her belongings including jeweleries. She has produced the photographs of her packed suitcases. According to her, there is undue delay to lodge the FIR.

5. Intervention application has been filed on behalf of first informant at Exhibit-2.

6. Ld. APP has submitted that all the valuable jeweleries gifted by her parents and in-laws are with the applicants and her husband. Applicants are not providing them information about their lockers so as to search for the jeweleries. Further she has submitted that applicants have concealed the fact that informant’s husband is their adopted son. informant’s gold jeweleries are also with the applicants. There is also possibility of absconding from Mumbai and shift to Dubai.

7. Ld. Advocate appearing for the Intervener has produced the copy of the article published in the Indian Express, wherein it is stated about the probe in ICIJ. So he submitted to reject the application of the applicants.

8. There may be any probe pending under ICIJ against the applicants which has no concern while deciding the present application which is arising out of the crime registered under Sections 498-A, 420, 406 and other relevant sections of IPC. It is the independent crime. It is not shown if any crime is registered against the applicants for allege involvement ICIJ. So at this juncture, there is no need to get impressed by the said proceedings.

9. The rest of the allegations made in the FIR against the applicants are of the general nature. It is shown that the first informant stayed for very short period with the applicants. Talking sarcastically and taunting to the first informant by the in-laws is the wear and tear of the married life, which every family witnesses. For those allegations the custody of the applicants who are old aged 80 years and 75 years respectively, is not required with the police. 10. For recovery of the ornaments, the Investigating Agency have already frozen their accounts. The investigation on that issue is going on. The continuous custody of the applicants is not required with the police on that count. Applicants can be directed to co-operate the police in investigation.

11. The apprehension of the prosecution that applicants may abscond from the jurisdiction of the present Court and shift to Dubai, to me, the applicants can be directed to surrender their passports to the police station for the investigation purpose. So their presence can be secured by the police during investigation. In the light of this discussion, I proceed to pass the following order:


(1) ABA No.1227/2020 is allowed.

(2) Senior Police Inspector, Police Station Malabar Hill, Mumbai, is hereby directed to release the applicants Ramesh Sitaldas Dalal and Malavicka Ramesh Dalal, in the event of their arrest in Crime No.152/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 406, 323 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, on execution of PR bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with one surety of like amount, on the following conditions:-

(i) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused.

(iii) The applicants shall surrender their passports on or before 19.12.2020, to Senior Police Inspector of Malabar Hill Police Station.

(iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

(v) The applicants shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court

(vi) The applicant shall co-operate the police in investigation and attend the police station Malabar Hill as and when required by Investigating Officer.

(3) Authenticated copy be given to concerned Police station and the ld. Advocate for the applicants.

(4) Case diary be returned.

(5) ABA No.1227/2020 a/w Intervention application stand disposed of accordingly.

Designated Judge under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012,
16.12.2020. for Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 16.12.2020
Transcribed on : 17.12.2020
Signed by HHJ on : 18.12.2020


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!