Allowed

Bachittar Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Oct 2010CRM-M/17745/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners seeking anticipatory bail for dowry harassment participated in investigation. Court made bail order absolute, directing complainant with police and a relative to seize dowry articles from a locked room after giving one-day notice.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 28.06.2010 making anticipatory bail absolute; complainant directed to seize dowry articles from locked room after one day notice.

Bachittar Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab — Dowry and Cruelty | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

CRM No. M 17745 of 2010 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM No. M 17745 of 2010 Date of decision: 07.10.2010

¶4

Bachittar Singh and others ........ Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent(s)

¶5

Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶6

-.-

¶7

Present: Mr. T S Sangha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Narinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioners

¶8

Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab for the respondent State

¶9

Mr. M J S Bedi, Advocate for the complainant

¶10

-.-

¶11

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?

¶12

To be referred to the Reporter or not?

¶13

Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral)

¶15

This is a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No. 32 dated 30.04.2010 under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Dayalpura, District Bathinda.

¶16

The petitioners were granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide this Court's order dated 28.06.2010. Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI-Gurnam Singh, states that the petitioners have since

¶17

CRM No. M 17745 of 2010 2

¶18

joined the investigation.

¶19

At this stage, learned counsel for the complainant states that some of the dowry articles are still lying in possession of the petitioners.

¶20

However, Mr. T.S. Sangha, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners states that the aforesaid alleged dowry articles are lying in a locked room in the house of petitioner No. 4 and keys of that room are with the complainant herself. It is further stated that they have no objection if the articles lying in the said room are handed over to the complainant.

¶21

In view of the above, the order dated 28.06.2010 passed by this

¶22

Court is made absolute.

¶23

Accordingly, the complainant accompanied by any one of her family members along with the concerned Investigating officer may visit the house of petitioner No. 4 after giving her one day advance notice and take dowry articles ;lying in the said locked room. Inventory of the same be also prepared.

¶24

(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge

¶25

07.10.2010 mohan

Bachittar Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bachittar Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivraj Singh Vs State of Punjab

Avtar Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jagjeet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jagdev Singh Vs State of Punjab

Dhoop Dass & Anr. Vs Jagdish Chander & Ors.

Sukhpal Singh Vs State of Punjab