The Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail in the case of Yusuf Usman Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra. He has been accused of the practice of triple talaq against his second wife.
Brief Facts of the Case
The petitioner is a police sub-inspector in the Ghatkopar Police Station. His second wife registered an FIR against him. The FIR stated that the petitioner has a wife and two children from his first marriage. He solemnised marriage with complainant Ms Samiya Shaikh in 2018. The wedding took place as per Muslim custom and practice. The complainant thereafter conceived a child with him. At his insistence, she terminated her pregnancy. She again became pregnant and delivered a girl child in December 2019. She alleges that following the birth of the child, the petitioner divorced her. He did the same by sending her the word ‘Talaq’ thrice via text message. She also alleged that he refused to take care of the child, and forcefully had intercourse with her.
The petitioner was charged under Sections 376(2), 377, 323 and 504 of the IPC, 1860. He was also accused of offences punishable under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.
Court’s Analysis
The complainant entered into a sexual relationship with the petitioner only after marriage. She was not forced to enter into the same. Hence no custodial interrogation is necessary. The case of rape under Section 376(2) IPC, 1860, therefore, stands dismissed. Reading a Talaqnama on the phone, however, attracts the provisions of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019. The offence is also bailable under it. The Court noted the petitioner is a Sub-Inspector at the Police Station where his wife filed the FIR. Hence, he is not likely to flee. The Courts thus entitled the petitioner to bail in the event of his arrest.
Court’s Order
The petitioner was allowed anticipatory bail on the following conditions-
- He furnishes a bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties of like amount.
- That he should not directly/indirectly induce/threaten/promise any person related to the case. Furthermore, he should not persuade any Police Officer to tamper with evidence or not disclose the truth to the Court.
- Also, that he will make himself available to the Investigating Officer whenever required.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
