1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3453 of 2007 Dr.Mohit Jogendra Trivedi .. Applicant versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents ... Mr.Prakash Naik for the applicant. Mr.Abhay G. Redij for respondent no.2. Mr.K.V. Saste APP for the state. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J DATED : 10th January 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant seeks anticipatory bail with offences registered against him at Vile Parle police station under C.R. No. 363 of 2007 for offences 2 punishable under section 498A, 506II, 504, 323 r/w sec.34 of the IPC. According to respondent no.2 wife of the applicant, the applicant has been treating her with cruelty. The applicant had previously filed an application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court, Mumbai. However by an order dated 11th October 2007, the Addl. Sessions Judge rejected the said application. 3. In its order dated 11th October 2007, the Sessions Court has observed that though the applicant is a qualified doctor giving treatment to his patients, he has filed to understand his wife. He is not willing to reside separately from his parents which was a condition put forward for settlement by the wife. The learned Sessions Judge thus appears to have held that refusal by the husband to stay separately from his parents despite the demand by his wife amounts to cruelty. This is the only ground on which the bail application has been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submitted that refusing to reside separately is not the only ground of cruelty but the demand for money is also another ground which is stated in the FIR. He invited my attention to the FIR dated 8th September 2007 for the same. Therein it is alleged 3 that on 30th January 2005, the father of respondent no.2 gave a sum of Rs.10 lakhs to the parents of the applicant. Therefore the first allegation is regarding payment of money made to the parents and it is not stated that the money was demanded by the applicant. Secondly, the payment appears to have been made 2 years 9 months ago as claimed in the FIR and no complaint was made earlier. 5. Taking into consideration an overall view and also taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is a respectable citizen in the medical profession and has a permanent place of residence in Mumbai and is willing to co-operate with the investigation, in my view he is entitled to anticipatory bail. Accordingly, I pass the following order:- O R D E R O R D E R O R D E R . In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with C.R. No.363 of 2007 registered at Vile Parle police station, he shall be released on bail on personal bond of Rs..50,000/- with one or more sureties of the aggregate amount of Rs.50,000/- subject to the condition that the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall 4 co-operate with the investigation. . The applicant shall attend the concerned police station once a week on every Saturday between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. and also attend the police station or any other time if summoned specifically and to co-operate with the investigation. This order of Anticipatory bail shall come to an end of charge-sheet being filed whereupon the applicant if arrested shall apply to the regular court for bail who shall consider the application on its on merits without being in any way influenced by the observations made in the order. (D.G. KARNIK, J)