Allowed

Ashish Malik v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Sept 2019CRM-M/46278/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court grantees anticipatory bail to the applicant in a Section 498-A case pending trial, accepting interim directions as permanent subject to a payment condition and regular court appearances, deeming custodial interrogation unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail subject to payment of `4 lacs to the complainant and unconditional appearance in the Trial Court.

Ashish Malik Vs State of Punjab — Dowry and Cruelty | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-46278-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 26.9.2019

Ashish Malik

… Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶9

Present:Mr. Mohit Jaggi, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

¶11

Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate for the complainant.

¶12

¶13

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J

¶14

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No.321 dated 20.9.2017 under Sections 406/498-A IPC at Police Station Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.

¶15

The FIR was registered at the instance of Niti wherein it has been alleged that her marriage was solemnized with Ashish Malik on 4.7.2014 wherein an amount of 50 lacs was spent. However, her husband and other members of his family was not happy with the dowry and started demanding an amount of 15 lacs and used to torture her daily. It is further alleged that complainant's husband was in touch with a lady namely Savita Bhardwaj since the last 6 years and wanted to marry her. It is also alleged that whenever complainant's sister-in-law Navita used to come, even she used to pass tauting remarks and used to incite her parents and brother against the

¶16

KAMAL KUMAR 2019.09.30 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

2 CRM-M-46278-2017 (O&M)

¶18

complainant. It is asserted that her in-laws disowned the complainant and her husband from their movable and immovable properties in a conspiracy to deprive the complainant of her legitimate claim whereas her husband is residing with his parents. It is also alleged that an amount of ` 1,98,000/had also been withdrawn from complainant's account by stealing her cheques and ATM Card.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the present case and that the entire allegations regarding demand of dowry or regarding withdrawal of an amount of ` 1,98,000/- are all cooked up allegations. The learned counsel has submitted that in order to prove his bona fide , he is willing to deposit an amount in the name of his wife and is even willing to maintain her.

¶20

Opposing the petition, the learned State counsel has submitted that in view of the specific and categoric allegations levelled in the FIR, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. It is, however, informed that the petitioner has since joined investigation and that challan has already been presented.

¶21

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. Apparently, it is a case which has arisen out of matrimonial discord amongst the parties. The FIR also suggests that one of the grievances of the complainant is that her husband is having an affair with another lady. There are also allegations as regards demand of an amount of ` 15 lacs. In any case, the investigation has already been concluded and challan stands presented. In these circumstances, custodial interrogation is certainly not warranted.

¶22

KAMAL KUMAR 2019.09.30 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶23

CRM-M-46278-2017 (O&M)

¶24

¶25

The petition, as such, is accepted and the interim directions issued vide order dated 7.12.2017 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner shall pay an amount of ` 4 lacs to the complainant and shall appear before the Trial Court regularly and abide by all such conditions as may be imposed by the Court. It is clarified that the aforesaid amount is not to be treated as any kind of admission on part of accused and shall be paid unconditionally irrespective of the outcome of trial.

¶26

The petition stands accepted accordingly.

¶27

26.9.2019			(Gurvinder Singh Gill)
kamal			Judge
	Whether speaking /reasoned	Yes	/ No
	Whether Reportable	Yes	/ No

¶28

KAMAL KUMAR 2019.09.30 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ashish Malik v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Malik 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

Santosh Kumar@Sunny Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Others

Bhupinder Singh and Others Vs Parminder Kaur

Bhagwan Dass Vs State of Punjab

Gulzar Masih and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Nitin Vs State of Haryana and Another

Surinderpal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others