Dismissed

Gurmit Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC15 May 2012CRM-M/13893/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was an original petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The petitioner, in a dowry harassment and cruelty case, sought bail. The single judge dismissed the petition without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

The petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed as devoid of merit without expressing an opinion on the merits.

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

¶1

Crl.M.No.M-13893 of 2012(O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl.M.No.M-13893 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: May 15, 2012

Gurmit Singh

.....Petitioner

State of Punjab

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr.Vikasdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

.......

¶13

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.152, dated 13.12.2011, under Sections 498-A, 406, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

¶16

Brief allegations are that petitioner got married with complainant on 29.11.2008. Sufficient dowry was given in the marriage, detail of which has been given in the FIR. However, just after 3-4 months of the marriage, harassment of complainant started at the hands of petitioner and family members. They used to give her beatings even during her pregnancy. She was turned out of matrimonial home. She gave birth to a female child in the house of her parents. However, petitioner did not bother

¶17

-2-

¶18

Crl.M.No.M-13893 of 2012(O&M)

¶19

to visit her to see the child in the house of her parents. Nothing was paid by petitioner to complainant for her expenses and for expenses of the newly born child. Panchayat was convened and due to intervention of the Panchayat complainant was brought to the matrimonial home by present petitioner and, however, again she was turned out of the house by committing further acts of cruelty upon her.

¶20

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that allegations of physical violence are against mother and sister of petitioner and not specifically against the petitioner.

¶21

Be that as it may, it was the responsibility of the petitioner being husband to keep his wife properly in the matrimonial home. There are serious allegations of harassment and cruelty having been committed upon complainant by petitioner and family members. Some of dowry articles are yet to be recovered.

¶22

Hence, in view of the these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioneraccused.

¶23

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Gurmit Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.

¶24

(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge

¶25

15.5.2012

¶26

meenu

Gurmit Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurmit 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

Harwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Hari Gopal Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Amit Kumar Vs Vijay Laxmi and Ors.

Surinder Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Raj Kumar Alias Raju Vs State of Punjab

Gurpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.