High Court dismissed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving allegations of dowry demand and harassment. The court held that the facts did not warrant extraordinary relief and vacated an interim order.
Petition for anticipatory bail dismissed; interim order dated 24.9.2012 vacated.
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.
-1-
Crl.M.No.M-29750 of 2012(O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-29750 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: November 3, 2012
Barjinder Singh and others
.....Petitioners
v.
State of Punjab
......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.Pankaj Mulwani, DAG, Punjab.
Mr.A.S.Lohat, Advocate for the complainant.
......
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.85, dated 29.8.2012, under Sections 406, 498A IPC, registered at Police Station Mulepur, District Fatehgarh Sahib.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully.
Brief allegations against petitioners-accused are that marriage of complainant-Mandeep Kaur was performed with petitioner no.1Barjinder Singh as per Anandkaraj Ceremony on 17.11.2010. Sufficient amount was spent in the marriage by parents of the complainant. Sufficient dowry was given in the marriage, details of which has been given in the complaint. The same was entrusted to present petitioners and other family members. However, petitioners and other family members were not satisfied with the same and there was demand of `2 lacs and one Alto car. When complainant tried to make petitioners understand that her father had already spent sufficient amount beyond his capacity, then on 31.12.2010 at about 9.00 p.m. threat was raised to complainant that in case their demands
Crl.M.No.M-29750 of 2012(O&M)
-2-
would not be met, she would be expelled from matrimonial home or she would be killed. On the pressure of petitioners, she also made a telephonic call to her father. Petitioner no.1 came in a drunken condition and slapped her. Her father reached at about 9.00 a.m. on 2.1.2011 and she accompanied her father to her parental home. On 5.1.2011 father of complainant gave telephonic call to one of the petitioners requesting them that they should take complainant to the matrimonial home and, however, petitioners replied that until and unless demand of Alto car and `2 lacs is met, she would not be allowed to live in matrimonial home. On 6.1.2011 at about 6.30 p.m., petitioner no.1 called father of complainant on his mobile phone and again raised the said demand. Father of complainant tried to resolve the matter and had taken many panachayats to the house of petitioners. One of the panchayats was convened on 7.1.2011 and, however, petitioners refused to rehabilitate the complainant in the matrimonial home.
Hence, there are specific allegations of acts of cruelty and harassment being committed upon complainant by all the petitioners on account of dowry. Some of the articles have already been recovered. However, golden ornaments are yet to be recovered.
Hence, in view of these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitionersaccused.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioners-Barjinder Singh, Balwinder Singh and Inderjit Kaur for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.
Interim order dated 24.9.2012 is vacated.
meenu
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
3.11.2012
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners accused of dowry harassment.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
BARJINDER SINGH and others
STATE OF PUNJAB
RAM CHAND GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
