NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has observed that the law does not permit the husband to take the household articles including the jewellery without informing the wife and without her consent and knowledge.
Justice Amit Mahajan was dealing with the pre-arrest bail of the man on the complaint of his wife, in which it was stated that she found the house was locked and household articles were stolen when she was away. The husband’s lawyer argued that the parties are litigating and the FIR against the man was registered due to matrimonial discord.
The court, however, said, “..even though the applicant is the husband of the complainant, the law does not permit even the husband to take the household articles including the jewellery in this manner.” “No person can be allowed to take the law into his own hands with an excuse that the parties are litigating.
Only because a complaint of wife in relation to ‘istridhan’(her possessions) is pending, does not mean that the husband can be allowed to surreptitiously throw the wife out of the matrimonial house and take away the articles,” the court noted.
Rejecting pre-arrest bail to the applicant, the court said, "It is settled that the power under Section 438 of the CrPC (anticipatory bail) is not to be exercised in a routine manner. The power is to be exercised in case it is felt that accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him held.”
“Similarly, the order of bail in anticipation of arrest, cannot be granted for it to be used as a shield. In the facts of the present case, it cannot be said at this stage that the allegations made are frivolous or have only been made with the object to injure or humiliate the applicant by having him arrested,” the order said.