Need Urgent Suggestion...

It's all depends on how the bank management going to treat your case when they see your declaration on reporting. In the first instance they'll post you for training and after this stint you may be apptt. to branches. It may be necessary if you would discuss the matter before hand with the concerned HR at the reporting bank and take their advice. whatever we would opine it might not help you to solve your instant problem. For the present, you should file your plaint in the HC seeking quashing her petition.
How long you have been married, any issues ? Is this case filed with the police or lying in the Court ? Is't a civil suit for divorce and claim for maintenance or criminal petition against harassment.

Thanks to all for ur valuable suggestions.I want to mention one more thing while I filled online form of banking there was no column related with any case /fir pending against me but there was column of any conviction/detention/arrest which is not happened to me yet.i have got anticipatry bail.I have discussed with some bankers they told me that there shouldn't be any problem in joining because ur not convicted...Is it so?
Regards
Rohit sharma

Still my advice would be to inform your bank about pending case during joining formalities.
Hopefully the case will die a normal death.

So far the queriest gave the impression as if the employer knew about all these and question was whether employer may decline him to join the job. But now the query is different. Now fact is that the attestation form has already been filled up with answers in negative.

In this regard, reference may be made to an Allahabad HC decision referred in para 10(4) of the above quoted Vineet kumar case of CAT. It was held that where G.O. does not require furnishing of information on an issue, the appointee is not required to furnish information on it. Now at this juncture before joining the queriest gives the information which was not demanded by employer, god knows which officer takes what sort of stand in which case the appointee will not be heard to give his view. The employer!oyer may decline his joining and then god knows for how much time the queriest may remain out of employment. He may have to fight case to allow him to join. The trend of corruption in country is known to everyone. Thus the appointee will be deprived of his salary for how many years!! Who is going to compensate him. Whereas if he joins and later any issue crops up then he can fight while in job.

Thanks

Sushil

Sushil,
My worry is when and if the case suddenly comes up will department keep quiet and not ask him questions.
There is a column for arrest detention etc against which querist has taken anticipatory bail.
There are complex issues in this case.
I am indeed surprised there is column for arrest/detention but no column for details of any pending criminal cases.
Somehow I feel there is a gap in information being provided.

Anticipatory bail means bail in anticipation of arrest. If the need arises to arrest then the order of anticipatory bail comes into operation. See Balchand Jain case decided by Apex court. In matrimonial cases, even FIR is registered after mediation etc fails before Crime against woman cell. But mere making of complaint is not a FIR. Thus information regarding mere involvement in a case is not demanded by employer and one is not supposed to deliver more than asking in a case of prejoining as discussed above see Vineet Kumar case. Sometimes furnishing of uncalled for information becomes more damaging as discussed above.
Thanks
Sushil

The case presumably still with the police, the queriest has not revealed the 'grounds' of the case/FIR, except 'its for dowry' and he has taken AB. For the present he has temporary relief. But what happens if the FIR contains some 'non-bailable' sections and action on these lines are pursued ? Ofcourse there is no immediate block for him to report. What happens when he is to be served summons and warrants of arrest in due course. Continuing in his job itself will be in danger though his bail could come in handy. Better he should consult a practising advocate and move on.

I think the queriest is not satisfied with our replies above and has posted the same query in a separate thread today. This is smartness of young generation.
Thanks