Allowed

Manjeet v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Aug 2011CRM-M/10518/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, mother-in-law of the complainant, was arrested in a dowry harassment case. The court granted pre-arrest bail on the condition that she joins the investigation and pays Rs. 1.50 lacs to the complainant in lieu of the dowry articles claimed to be in her possession.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted pre-arrest bail on conditions to join investigation and pay Rs. 1.50 lacs in lieu of dowry articles.

Manjeet Vs State of Haryana — Dowry and Cruelty | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No.M-10518 of 2011 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

¶3

CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-10518 of 2011

¶5

Date of Decision: August 24, 2011

Manjeet

…..Petitioner

Vs.

State of Haryana

…..Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.

¶12

-.-

¶13

Present:Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶14

Ms. Shalini Attri, DAG, Haryana.

¶15

-.-

¶16

M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)

¶17

Petitioner is mother-in-law of complainant Savita. There are allegations of physical cruelty and demand of dowry against the son of the petitioner. The FIR has been registered on the basis of a complaint filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate.

¶18

It appears that the parties could not reconcile the matter before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

¶19

Crl. Misc. No.M-10518 of 2011

¶20

[2]

¶21

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is looking after the two minor children born out of the wed-lock of the complainant and the son of the petitioner. The son had been arrested and granted the concession of regular bail.

¶22

State counsel has opposed the petition for pre-arrest bail on the ground that recoveries of the jewellery articles are yet to be effected as the petitioner had admitted that she has got the jewellery articles lying with her.

¶23

I have heard counsel for the petitioner and gone through the record and police file. Without entering into the controversy whether the jewellery articles are yet to be recovered from the petitioner, it is deemed apt to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner on payment of some amount in lieu of the tentative cost of the jewellery articles which are claimed by the complainant to be in possession of the petitioner being her mother-in-law. The petitioner has also joined investigation pursuant to the interim order.

¶24

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioner she will be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the following conditions:

¶25

i) that the petitioner will join investigation as and when required by the police; and that

¶26

ii) she will pay a sum of Rs.1.50 lacs to complainant Savita in the shape of bank draft to be handed over to the investigating officer on September 17, 2011. The said bank draft will be handed over by the

¶27

Crl. Misc. No.M-10518 of 2011

¶28

[3]

¶29

investigating officer to complainant Savita without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner or complainant. The said amount will be adjustable in case of any final amicable settlement regarding the dowry articles.

¶30

It is made clear that in case of violation of any of the abovesaid conditions the complainant or the State will be entitled to seek the cancellation of bail.

¶31

August 24, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE

Manjeet v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjeet v. State of Haryana

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

Ram Parsad & Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Sampuran Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jasbir Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sunil @ Kala Vs State of Haryana

Ramdiya & Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Raman Kumar Vs State of Punjab