1 Cri.Appln.No.3417/2009 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3417/2009. ( Kailash Narayan Shukla and Ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. AS Barlota, Adv. for Applicant/s; Mr. BJ Sonawane, APP for State. Mr.KC Sant, Adv. For Respondent no.2. *** CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 16 th June, 2011. 1) Owing to earlier noting and particularly dated 14th September, 2010, the mater is to be heard finally at the stage of admission. Heard finally accordingly. 2) The controversy, between the spouse basically arising out of love affair and then turning into registered marriage, has reached to the Court. 3) The grievance of the petitioners herein, who are parents of Vivek, husband of the respondent No.2 – Smt. Meenal, is, that the first statement of respondent – Meenal does not implicate the petitioners herein, however, in spite of this, charge sheet is filed against them. 4) Based on such assertion of learned Counsel, I have gone through the supplementary statement of Meenal. From the charge sheet, as canvassed by him, primary reading thereof implicates the petitioners herein. What is 2 Cri.Appln.No.3417/2009 the worth thereof need not be dissected at this stage in writ jurisdiction. It will be based on the evidence, the matter would be sorted and impairment, if any, that has been caused to the resondent-wife, would be redressed or asserted to. In the situation, when specifically the respondent-wife alleged demand of Rs.2.5 lakhs, 200 grams of gold and 2 kg. of silver, at the behest of the parents, i.e. the petitioners herein, by Vivek, the husband, it cannot be said that the petitioners are falsely roped in. These are primary observations, need not be weighed as final. 5) Howver, considering the residential addresses of the petitioners, as disclosed, they basically hail from Indore and gainfully employed, least chances of their jumping and non-cooperating. The learned Judge, seized with the matter, shall luxuriously entertain exemption application, if moved by the petitioners till effective hearing. Needless to add, identity of these petitioners is not disputed during submission. 6) With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/