Bombay High Court denies anticipatory bail to Muslim man who allegedly divorced his wife by Triple Talaq

Cancerous to Justice System if witness believe they are Beyond the Rule of Law: Bombay HC

On 21st October, 2020, the Bombay High Court denied anticipatory bail to a Muslim man who allegedly divorced his wife by giving triple talaq which is an offence under The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

The matter was heard by Justice Sarang V Kotwal and order has been passed stating that 

“Considering the gravity of the allegations, the applicant does not deserve protection of anticipatory bail. The applicant left her at her parental house. Her number was blocked by the applicant. This lends corroboration to the allegations that, he had divorced informant illegally in violation of the provisions of The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.”

According to the FIR, the applicant herein used to give an intoxicating drink and had took private photographs/videos of his former wife (first informant). In October 2018, the applicant also had unnatural sex with her. Further, the applicant harassed her and forced her to bring money from her parental house. On which, FIR was registered against the applicant under sections of IPC, IT Act & Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

The bail applicant has married this woman (first informant) after divorcing two of his former wives. Probably, this first informant is the third wife of the applicant. 

The first informant alleges that her husband had asked her to do all the work in the house. When she refused to do so the applicant is alleged to have assaulted her and given her “talaq”.She was left at her parental house. She alleged further that the applicant has threatened to leak her private videos and photographs. Thereafter, the applicant is stated to have blocked the first informant’s phone number.

Consequently, the applicant has contended that the FIR was based on false allegations. The first informant had assaulted his two minor daughters. It was argued that there were Whatsapp messages sent by the first informant which clearly indicate that she had no grievance against the applicant.

The first informant, however, asserted that the allegations in the FIR were true. She added that she had stayed on with the applicant to save her marriage, before the Triple Talaq was given.

Upon hearing, the Court added that the applicant may establish his defence during the trial. And has further passed an order stating that,

“There are serious allegations of inserting rod in her private parts. There are allegations that, indecent photos and videos were recorded. This requires custodial interrogation of the applicant. In this view of the matter, anticipatory bail to the applicant cannot be granted.”

On these grounds, the application for Anticipatory Bail was rejected by the Court.

Previous articleSC : Airtel, Vodafone ordered to submit segmented offer details to TRAI
Next articleWhat is Plea-Bargaining and its effect in court proceeding?
I am T. Madiha, a final year student of BA.LL.B from Osmania University, Hyderabad. I'm spontaneous, attentive, and a good observer. I always would like to express my prior concern in research & writing skills as it enhance me to grow for the future endeavours in the legal field. I strongly believe in Theodore Roosevelt quote by focusing on my actions rather than words as he once said - "Do what you can with all you have, wherever you are". I have sole interests on various spheres of law and wants to change the societal issues for better world. I love to live in a dynamic environment where people help others to develop their skills, my suggestions have actively been taken up in the same.