In a petition for pre-arrest bail under a dowry harassment FIR involving physical torture and hospitalization, the Judge refused bail citing no grounds for anticipation of arrest and stated that dismissal would not hinder a future compromise.
Application for pre-arrest bail dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
-.-
Crl. Misc. No. M- 1589 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 17.3.2009
Akash Jain
Versus State of Punjab
Present:- Mr. J.B.S.Gill, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Rajni Gupta, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Pranabh Rai, Advocate, for the complainant.
M.M.S.BEDI. (J) (Oral)
Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered at the instance of complainant alleging that she has been subject to physical and mental torture for not bringing sufficient dowry and cash. There are allegations in the FIR that she was pressurised to bring Rs.10 lac from her parents, but on her refusal she was given beating with brutality to the extent that she had to be hospitalised and her pancreas had been badly injured.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the time of preliminary hearing, submitted that there are chances of compromise as such petitioner was directed to submit a sum of Rs.15,000/- with the Registry to summon the complainant as respondent No.2 in the case.
Today the complainant is present in Court. She has confirmed that she had been mercilessly beaten and that she, compelled with said circumstances is staying with her parents along with two children.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that complainant is under pressure and that the statement made by her is under the instigation of her family members.
Crl. Misc. No. M- 1589 of 2009
-2-
After hearing the complainant and learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the nature of the allegations, I do not find any ground to grant the petitioner concession of pre-arrest bail. Dismissal of this petition will not in any manner prevent the parties to enter into a compromise at any subsequent stage.
The present petition is dismissed at this stage.
March 17, 2009 tripti
(M.M.S.Bedi) Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail in a FIR alleging cruelty and dowry harassment with injuries.
Akash Jain
State of Punjab
M.M.S.Bedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
