Harpal Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-5327 of 2024 #1# 2024:PHHC:013584

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-5327 of 2024 Harpal Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent Date of Decision: 01.02.2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Present:

Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J Prayer is for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.40 dated 09.06.2023 under Sections 498-A,406,354,34 IPC registered at P.S Women, District Bathinda.

As per allegations in the FIR, marriage of the complainant was solemnized with Jaspal Singh/co-accused of the petitioner on 12.12.2020. It is alleged that the petitioner being 'Jeth' of the complainant and other inlaws, family members including her husband used to harass and maltreat the complainant on account of bringing less dowry besides abusing her parents. When the complainant objected to it, she was beaten up by the petitioner and other in-laws, family members. The complainant was also admitted to Civil Hospital in Bathinda where she got the treatment after having been assaulted physically at the hands of the petitioner and other in-laws, family members. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is brother-in-law (Jeth) of the complainant and is being falsely roped in. He contends that the petitioner is living separately and all the allegations MANOJ KUMAR 2024.02.02 05:48

CRM-M-5327 of 2024 #2# 2024:PHHC:013584 levelled are concocted as the complainant used to quarrel with her in-laws and that the complaint was made after more than three years of marriage. It is contended that co-accused/Paramjeet Kaur (nanad) of the petitioner has already been granted the concession of interim bail vide order dated 22.11.2023 (Annexure P.3) passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bathinda.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper book with his able assistance.

It stands noticed from the contents of the FIR that the petitioner along with other family members used to abuse the complainant. He is specifically alleged to have physically assaulted the complainant and torn her clothes apart from threatening her not to disclose about the beatings to her father. There are specific allegations of cruelty/harassment against the petitioner.

Perusal of FIR clearly mentions that even after an inquiry made by the police officials, allegations qua demand of dowry and the plight of the complainant have been found to be true.

Considering the nature and gravity of the offence and taking note of the allegations, no ground is made out to grant the relief. Dismissed.

February 01, 2024 (Sudeepti Sharma) manoj Judge Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2024.02.02 05:48