abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 227 OF 2008 Nitin M. Prajapati .. Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Indra Prakash h/f Mr.Akhilesh Singh for the applicant. Mr.S.S. Pednekar, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 12TH FEBRUARY 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. By this application under section 438 of the Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with the crime registered with Virar Police Station under M.C.R. No.3/2007 for an offence punishable under sections 498-A, 406, 323, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. - 2 - 3. The applicant was married to Jagruti d/o Jagjivanram Goghare on 3rd February 2001. A daughter was born to the couple in the year 2002. It appears that thereafter the applicant and his wife fell apart and Jagruti has filed a petition for divorce in the Family Court in the year 2005. According to the wife, streedhan ornaments are being withheld by the applicant and he is not returning the same to her. On 9th December 2007, Jagruti filed an FIR which runs into nearly 10 typed pages alleging several acts which amount to cruelty and ill-treatment. Apprehending arrest in connection with the crime registered under the FIR, the applicant, his mother, brother and sister-in-law made an application for anticipatory bail in the Sessions Court. By an order dated 14th January 2008, the learned Sessions Judge, Vasai granted anticipatory bail to all except the applicant. The applicant has therefore moved this Court for pre-arrest bail. 4. The only reason given in the order of the learned Sessions Judge for distinguishing the case of the applicant while rejecting his bail is that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the purpose of attaching the clothes of Jagruti which the applicant is not returning and the motorcycle allegedly claimed as dowry. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the motorcycle is lying parked in the - 3 - building where the applicant and Jagruti were residing jointly and the police can recover it any time or else the applicant would surrender it. As regards the clothes of Jagruti, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that they have been taken away by her when she left the house in the year 2005. 5. Prima facie, there appears to be civil dispute between the parties. The present FIR is a culmination of the said civil dispute. The FIR appears to have been filed on account of the said civil dispute two years after Jagruti left her matrimonial home. The delay in lodging the FIR is not sufficiently explained. In the circumstances, the applicant is entitled to pre-arrest bail. Hence, I pass the following order. ORDER ORDER ORDER In the event of the arrest of the applicant in connection with the offence mentioned above, he shall be released on bail on executing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties of the aggregate amount of Rs.25,000/- each subject to the condition that the applicant shall not dispose of the motorcycle and shall surrender it to the police within 7 days and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. This order shall come to an end after the charge sheet is filed whereupon the applicant may apply for regular - 4 - bail before the regular court. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)