Karamjit Kaur v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-8206-2022 Decided on : 09.03.2022 Karamjit Kaur ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present :

Mr. R.K.Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Simran Grewal, AAG, Punjab.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.(Oral) Instant petition has been filed under Section 439(2) Cr.PC for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondents No.2 and 3 by this Court vide order dated 10.02.2022.

At the very outset, on a query put to learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether any condition imposed by this Court while granting the concession of anticipatory bail to respondents No.2 and 3 had been violated, he replied in the negative.

Learned counsel, however, submitted that the submissions made by learned State counsel that respondents No.2 and 3 had handed over the istridhan/dowry articles of the complainant i.e. petitioner during investigation, and she had refused to accept the same was totally incorrect inasmuch as respondents No.2 and 3 had not got any of the dowry articles recovered. He still further submitted that respondent No.2 had forged a document (Annexure P-14) in collusion with the Gurudwara Gobind Sar Parbhandak Committee, Jalandhar to create evidence in his favour in the instant case and hence, on this ground itself the anticipatory bail granted to SONIA BURA 2022.03.10 13:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

CRM-M-8206-2022 -2respondents No.2 and 3 deserved to be cancelled. Heard and perused the relevant material on record. The private respondents were extended the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 10.02.2022 in view of the instructions received by the learned State counsel that they had joined investigation in compliance of order dated 27.10.2021 of this Court and cooperated with the investigating agency by even returning the dowry articles, which however, were not accepted by the complainant/petitioner herein. Once the private respondents were not required for further investigation or for custodial interrogation , they were rightly extended the concession of anticipatory bail in the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE 09.03.2022 sonia Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SONIA BURA 2022.03.10 13:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh