Petitioners sought pre-arrest bail in a cheating case alleging consensual marriage. The court rejected bail claims, finding evidence of visa fraud conspiracy and dismissed the petition due to the seriousness of allegations.
Petition for pre-arrest bail dismissed; petitioners held not entitled to bail.
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.
Crl. Misc. No.M-13040 of 2012
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-13040 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision : May 8th , 2012
Hakam Singh and others
.... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab
.... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK
1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present Mr. P.S.Ahluwalia , Advocate, for the petitioners.
VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J.
Hakam Singh, his wife Jaswinder Kaur and son Sandeep Singh have sought pre-arrest bail in a case registered by way of FIR No.34 dated 9.4.2012 at Police Station Chhajli, District Sangrur for an offence punishable under sections 420 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after the marriage, which was a valid marriage, Parvinder Kaur, the wife, had stayed in the house of her husband for one month. According to him, after staying for one month at the house of her husband, it cannot be believed that the marriage was a paper marriage and that the complainant has been cheated. He has submitted that in the marriage, dowry was given including a car. He has submitted that after the marriage, Parvinder Kaur filed a petition for grant of visa to the complainant, but the Canadian embassy rejected the said prayer.
Crl. Misc. No.M-13040 of 2012
2
According to him, appeal was also filed by the wife against that decision, but the same was withdrawn because dismissal of the same would have foreclosed the right of the complainant for visa in future. He has submitted that the complainant wants divorce and for this reason, this false case has been got registered.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the complainant wants divorce, cannot be believed. It is Parvinder Kaur, who did not prepare herself for a proper interview. She is alleged to have not even gone to the embassy as a married woman and gave the impression that the claim to marriage was false. The appeal was though filed, but the same was not pursued in right earnest and was withdrawn on a very clumsy ground.
There are specific allegations against the petitioners and Parvinder Kaur that the attitude of these persons changed towards the complainant after the visa application was made and that demand of Rs.14.00 lacs was made upon the complainant if the complainant was to be settled in Canada. These circumstances clearly show that it is not a case of a matrimonial dispute.
Looking to the seriousness of the matter, I do not find the petitioners to be entitled to pre-arrest bail. The petition is, consequently, dismissed.
(VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE
May 8th , 2012 som
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail in a case of cheating involving allegations of consenting marriage.
Whether the allegations indicate a matrimonial dispute or criminal conspiracy for visa fraud.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Hakam Singh and others
State of Punjab
Vijender Singh Malik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
