NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has set aside an order of the Jharkhand High Court asking a man to pay Rs 10 lakh to his estranged wife as a condition to secure anticipatory bail in a dowry harassment case lodged against him.
The high court in its orders dated March 4 and 5, 2021, had directed the husband to deposit a demand draft of Rs 10 lakh as ad-interim victim compensation in favour of his wife. A bench of justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravi Kumar said it found no reasonable justification for the high court to call upon the appellant (husband) to submit a demand draft of `10 lakh in availing the benefit of pre-arrest bail. “Consequently, the appeal stands allowed and the order passed by the high court dated 04/05-03/2022 directing the appellant to deposit a demand draft of `10 lakh is hereby set aside,” it said.
The top court noted that the case is indeed a matrimonial dispute between the couple and their marriage was solemnised according to Hindu rites and customs on June 11, 2015, but later because of differences, an application was filed by the husband seeking dissolution of marriage on July 8, 2016.
It noted that the wife in the meantime also instituted a criminal complaint against her husband on July 27, 2017 before the chief judicial magistrate, which was later converted into a FIR on February 22, 2018 for offences under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The bench, in its order dated October 18 said that being the non-cognisable offence, the appellant (husband) approached the court by filing an application seeking pre-arrest bail.
It said that the high court granted pre-arrest bail on the premise that the husband shall resume the conjugal life as stated in his bail application. The bench observed that when the ground realities are such that the parties involved are into matrimonial discord, then instituting inter se proceedings to restore conjugal rights is otherwise not possible.
ALSO IN TOP COURT
Kerala against gold smuggling probe: ED
The ED has told the SC that the Kerala Government turned against the probe agency in the gold smuggling case after the role of CM Pinarayi Vijayan’s former principal secretary was detected. “When the probe progressed and the role of his own then Principal Secretary was detected, the State Machinery turned against ED and registered false cases by influencing the accused and making efforts to derail the probe and trial,” the ED said.
Hearing on Sedition Law on October 31
After the SC had put the colonial sedition law on hold in May 2022, a bench led by CJI UU Lalit is set to hear the pleas challenging the constitutionality of Section 124 A of the Indian Penal Code 1860 on October 31. A bench also comprising Justices SR Bhat and Bela M Trivedi will hear the plea that argued that the provision of law dated back to 1898 which predated the Constitution itself and was being misused.