1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 620 of 2010 Mr.Amit Satyavir Sharma ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ... Mr.M.G.Shukla i/b Mr.Girish Kulkarni for the applicant. Mr. J.B. Mishra for original complainant. Mr.J.P. Kharge APP for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 10th March 2010 P.C. 1. Heard Mr.Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the original complainant and Mr.Kharge, learned APP for the State. 2. By this application, applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R.No. 15 of 2010 registered at Charkop Police Station, Kandivli, Mumbai for an alleged offence punishable u/s. 498A, 406 r/w section 34 of the IPC. 2 3. Applicant was married to Seema on 25th November 2007. It appears that for a few months they lived together happily and then there was a matrimonial discord. Seema (hereinafter referred to as the “complainant”) is residing separately since 1st May 2009. Complainant filed FIR on 9th January 2010 alleging that at the time of marriage there was a dowry demand and also making other allegations against the applicant and his parents. 4. In my view, there is a considerable delay in lodging of the FIR. Marriage took place in November 2007. FIR has been lodged in January 2010. Assuming that since the complainant was cohabiting with the applicant till May 2009 and therefore she did not lodge the FIR, the delay after May 2009 is not satisfactorily explained. 5. As regards the allegation of misappropriation of Streedhan, the ornaments and other articles have been returned by the applicant to the police and are in custody of the police. Few other articles which have not been so returned to the police are offered to be given to the police by the applicant’s father vide letter dated 29th January 2010. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that even today applicant is willing to return the said articles to the complainant, if she desires or else the police may take them in their custody. Considering this, the applicant can be granted pre- arrrest bail. Hence, I pass the following order:- 3 O R D E R In the event applicant is arrested in connection with C.R. No. 15 of 2010 registered at Kandivli police station, he be released on bail on his executing P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety for the like amount. After this order was pronounce in the open court, learned counsel for the complainant states that complainant and her parents are willing to take back the articles mentioned in the letter of the applicant’s father dated 29th January 2010 (page 46 of the compilation) without prejudice to their rights and contentions. By consent of the applicant, the complainant and her parents are permitted to collect the articles from the applicant on 18th March 2010. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)