- (1.) The epitome of the facts and material, which needs a necessary mention, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy (anticipatory bail), involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record, is that the marriage of complainant Anushka Chanana was solemnized with Rishi Raj Tandon petitioner No.1 on 4.12.2011, according to Hindu rites & ceremonies at Faridabad. Her parents with the help of other relatives, were stated to have spent about '18 lacs by encashing FDR & withdrawing money from the provident fund at the time of her marriage and gave sufficient dowry articles. The complainant claimed that even before the marriage, petitioner Rishi Raj Tandon asked her that which car, her parents were going to give in the marriage. The parents of her husband compelled to perform marriage in some Five Star Hotel. On next day after the marriage, the petitioner-husband took her to Dwarka House and her father sent all the dowry articles & jewellery to their residential house. Even she was not allowed to wear jewellery when she had gone to Honeymoon on 8.12.2011. Petitioner No.1 taunted her that neither her parents had arranged the marriage in Five Star Hotel nor gave him the car. He again demanded Honda City car and ' 5 lacs in cash as his parents have to throw party for their relatives in a Five Star Hotel in Mumbai. On her refusal, petitioner Rishi Raj Tandon (husband) got angry and misbehaved a lot with her. The petitioners have also put pressure to transfer her parental house in their names. Rishi Raj Tandon threatened that she can return to matrimonial home, when her parental house is transferred in their name. Meanwhile, on 2.1.2012, he misbehaved, abused, pressurised and compelled her again & again to meet their unreasonable demands. On 25.1.2012, she returned to Delhi and then her husband abused her a lot and threatened her with dire consequences in case their illegal demands are not met. It was claimed that her father gave ' 3 lacs to Rishi Raj Tandon (husband) by arranging it from the relatives, but still, he repeatedly demanded Honda City car and ' 5 lacs in cash.
(2.) Leveling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events in detail, in all, the complainant claimed that the petitioners-accused taunted, harassed, abused, tortured and treated her with cruelty in connection with and on account of demand of dowry. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint of the complainant, the present case was registered against the petitioners, by virtue of FIR No.211 dated 2.6.2012 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 498-A and 506 IPC by the police of Police Station Central, Sector 12, Faridabad, in the manner depicted here-in-above.
(3.) Having exercised their right and failed in the court of Sessions Judge, the petitioners have preferred the instant petition in this Court for the grant of anticipatory bail in the indicated case, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC.;