Allowed

Dildar Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Dec 2012CRM-M/10260/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab and Haryana HC granted anticipatory bail to a government employee charged under IPC 498-A and 406 by converting interim bail into absolute bail subject to statutory conditions after noting maintenance payments and mediation failure.

What did the court decide?

The interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 10.05.2012 is made absolute subject to conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Dildar Singh Vs State of Punjab — Dowry and Cruelty | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM No.M-10206 of 2012 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.M-10260 of 2012 (O&M)

¶5

Date of decision : 18.12.2012

Dildar Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶12

Present: Mr. APS Shergill, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Mehardeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Surjit Singh.

¶14

None for respondent No.2-complainant.

¶15

Mr. Sukant Gupta, APP for UT Chandigarh.

¶16

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

¶17

The petitioner has approached this Court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.29 dated 19.09.2011, registered under Sections 498-A, 406 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station 'D' Division, Amritsar City, District Amritsar.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that FIR No.501 dated 10.12.2005, under Sections 366, 376 IPC, was lodged

¶19

CRM No.M-10206 of 2012 (O&M)

¶20

-2-

¶21

against the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner and the complainant got married on 14.02.2006. He also refers to the receipts of the amount deposited by the petitioner in the complainant's bank account. A photocopy of the receipts is taken on record as Mark 'A'.

¶22

The learned counsel for the U.T. Administration submits that cancellation report dated 02.03.2006, already stands submitted in the aforesaid FIR.

¶23

The learned counsel for the State of Punjab submits that few dowry articles are yet to be recovered from the petitioner.

¶24

Heard.

¶25

The petitioner is serving with the Education Department, Government of Punjab. He has been regularly paying the maintenance to his wife. The learned State counsel is unable to precisely state as to which dowry articles are to be recovered. The matter was also sent to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, however, as per the report of the Mediator, the mediation also failed.

¶26

Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances and the fact that the petitioner is in service of the Punjab Government, and he has caused appearance before the Investigating Officer, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the interim bail granted by this Court vide order dated 10.05.2012, is made absolute, subject to the conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶27

CRM No.M-10206 of 2012 (O&M)

¶28

-3-

¶29

The petition stands allowed.

¶30

18.12.2012 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE

¶31

Note : Whether to be referred to the reporter ? Yes / No.

Dildar Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dildar Singh 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

Ashok Kumar Vs St of Haryana

Karnail Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Jatinder Talwar and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Rajat Vohra and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another

Deepu Alias Davinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jagdev Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab