The character of a society can be best judged by how it treats women in the society, a Jammu & Kashmir Sessions Court recently observed while dismissing a plea for anticipatory bail filed by a husband who was accused of committing assault and robbery against his wife (Maqsood Ahmad Dar and others Versus Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir).
Principal Sessions Judge, Kulgam Tahir Khurshid Raina said that anticipatory bail is not meant for those “who do rank criminality against the helpless woman” and then claim protection from arrest.
“It is said that if we have to judge the character of any society, see how better they treat their women folk. Anticipatory bail is not meant for those who do rank criminality against the helpless woman and then claim protection from arrest. It will be sheer misuse of the provision of the law,” the Court observed.
The case against the husband was that he along with other accused had dragged the complainant-wife and her daughter and assaulted her.
The applicants/accused were booked by the police for offences of robbery, house trespass, criminal intimidation under Sections 392, 458, 354-B and 506 IPC on the basis of complaint lodged by the wife.
The accused contended that it was a case of matrimonial dispute which was being project by the complainant as robbery and home trespass.
The applicants/accused were booked by the police under section 147, 458, 427, 392, 354-B and 506 IPC on the basis of complaint lodged by the wife of the applicant No. 1 against them.
The Court had earlier granted the accused interim bail subject to certain conditions.
When the matter came up for hearing later, the Court noted that one of the conditions based on which bail was granted was that the accused would co-operate with the investigation.
But as per the CID file, the accused had handed over the order of the Court only one and a half months after the order of interim bail was passed.
“It is a glaring violation of the bail condition which amounts to disrupting the fair and speedy investigation in the case,” the Court said.
The Court further noted that the material on record suggested that applicants along with other co-accused attacked the complainant lady and her daughter.
Even if the complainant is wife of one of the accused, it does not give him the license to engage other persons and attack her, assault her and drag her out of her home and then claim it to be a matrimonial dispute, the Court said.
“Let a message travel across the length and breadth of this society not to be the tormentors of the dignity of the women but their saviours, especially the husband to act in the most decent manner with his wife and not as a goon who forms an unlawful assembly in the wee hours with other people, lurk into the house of the wife drag her and assault her blue and black, which is on the face of the record,” it added.
The Court, therefore, dismissed anticipatory bail application.