de facto complainant on 27.04.2002 and the allegations of t h e de facto complainant that though the demand of Rs.25,00,000/- and 50 tulas of gold as dowry is fulfilled, the petitioner treated her as a stranger, so also by the other accused persons, and in July, 2002 he left U.S.A. and even the de facto complainant joined him with H-4 Visa, he expressed his disinterest for children, in their wedlock two children were born, he insisted for abortion in March, 2005 and for the ill treatment in November, 2006 she returned to India and again went back to U.S.A. in February, 2007 and the petitioner - A.1 was having acquaintance with one Madhu and he harassed the de facto complainant like anything and thereby she finally came down to India and presented the report on 06.04.2013 with the allegations, clearly show prima facie accusation under Section 498-A of I.P.C. and this Court in Crl.P.No.5427 of 2014 opined that it is not a case within the four corners of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to grant anticipatory bail in his favour for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 406 read with 34 of I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 6 of the Act, 1961 of the crime registered, instead of dismissing by considering the personal liberty as part of the duty of the Court to balance, disposed of the application by giving liberty.
