In a matrimonial dispute where the husband expressed willingness to resume living with his wife but the wife refused, the High Court held that no case for cancellation of bail was made out. The petition was dismissed without engaging the respondent No. 2.
The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
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
Criminal Misc. -M No. 6348 of 2010 (O&M)
Babita Rani
.....Petitioner
VERSUS
Robin Verma and another
....Respondents
Present: Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Monica Chhibber Sharma, DAG, Punjab for the State.
Mr. Nand Lal Sammi, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
RANJIT SINGH, J.
The parties were summoned to see if there can be any settlement. The husband is willing to take his wife but she has expressed her unwillingness to accompany the husband. No case for cancellation of bail, therefore, is made out.
Dismissed.
August 24 , 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition for cancellation of bail is maintainable when the husband expresses willingness to resume cohabitation but the wife expresses unwillingness.
Babita Rani
Robin Verma
Ranjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
