Petitioner Vineet Rai sought anticipatory bail in a case involving dolry demands and cruelty under IPC sections 323, 406, 498-A, and 506. The Court held the petition untenable as custodial interrogation was essential.
Anticipatory bail application dismissed.
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.
Criminal Misc.No.M-43904 of 2013
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.No.M-43904 of 2013 Date of Decision: 21st December, 2013
Vineet Rai
.. Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors.
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr.Maninder Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.
Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner Vineet Rai who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.255, dated 03.07.2013, registered at Police Station, SGM Nagar, Faridabad.
Learned counsel contends that it has wrongly been averred in the impugned order that the petitioner did not join the investigation; that the petitioner is still ready to live with the complainant; that the present case has been registered at the behest of the parents of the complainant and the petitioner has not committed any offence; and that all the dowry articles are already in possession of the complainant or the Investigating Agency.
Heard.
The allegations against the petitioner are that he not only harassed and humiliated the complainant but also gave the severe beating to her at several occasions. The dowry articles were retained
Sharma Seema 2013.12.21 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
{2}
Criminal Misc.No.M-43904 of 2013
by the petitioner and his parents. The petitioner being main accused his custodial interrogation appears to be essential in the present case.
No ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is
made out.
Dismissed.
December 21, 2013 (Naresh Kumar Sanghi) seema Judge
Sharma Seema 2013.12.21 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner who allegedly committed offenses under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506 IPC in a matrimonial dispute.
VINEET RAI
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
