.jpg)
The Madhya Pradesh High Court in Meghna Agarwal Vs. Anurag Bagadiya and another cancelled the bail of a husband accused of unnatural sex with his wife. It noted that the anticipatory bail granted to the accused by the lower court was based on the premise that there was a delay in disclosing the offence u/s 377 IPC and that the complaint was made in a casual manner.
The Court observed that "This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that a wife is slow in rushing to the police station for making complaint of each and every act of harassment or maltreatment. The first intention of the wife is to save her married life and to give sufficient time to her in-laws as well as her husband, so that the situation may improve. The patience shown by the wife should not be treated as a weakness or an attempt to create a false story. Thus, if the applicant kept quiet for one year and did not disclose to her parents about the unnatural sex committed by the applicant, then it cannot be said that her conduct of keeping mum was nothing but an attempt to explain the delay."
It is the case of the prosecution that the wife was being physically and mentally harassed by her husband and in-laws for dowry. However, in order to save the pride of her parents, she silently tolerated the torture. In addition to the mental and physical torture, her husband regularly pressurized her into unnatural sex. When she objected to it, the accused husband threatened to kill her. She was eventually ousted from her matrimonial home by her in-laws but she waited for 10 months before lodging the FIR in the hope of saving her marriage. Finally, she filed the FIR against her husband for offences punishable under Section 3,4 Dowry Prohibition Act and under Section 498-A, 323, 377, 506 IPC.
The lower court granted anticipatory bail to the accused on the pretext of delay in filing the complaint. The wife, however, argued that the lower court failed to credit her patience and that she was trying to save her marriage. Further adding that when a girl despite all the torture tries to save the marriage then such conduct cannot be taken to her discredit for disbelieving the allegations of unnatural sex being delayed in nature.
The Court while hearing the submissions from both sides relied on a catena of judgments that extensively deal with the bail jurisprudence. All of them dealing with various factors to be kept in mind while granting bail, and the judicious use of the discretionary power of the courts in this case.
The Court also referred to a legal maxim “cessante ratione legis cessat ipsa lex” meaning “reason is the soul of the law, and when the reason of any particular law ceases, so does the law itself”, is also apposite. Therefore, every judicial order should bear a reason in consonance with the basic fundamentals of law and logic.
Therefore, looking at the seriousness of the complaint the High Court held that the reason of delay in filing the complaint taken by the lower court in granting the anticipatory bail to the accused was unwarranted, and that there was a material irregularity in the order. Thus, cancelling the bail of the husband.