Daljit Singh v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 17.04.2023 DALJIT SINGH ....Petitioner Vs.
STATE OF PUNJAB
...Respondent
CORAM:-HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI
Present:
Mr. Salil Dev Singh Bali, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kunwarbir Singh, Assistant A.G. Punjab.
***** AMARJOT BHATTI, J. (Oral) 1.
The petitioner Daljit Singh has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.2, dated 02.01.2023 under Sections 498-A, 323, 325 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Mamdot, District Ferozepur.
2.
The facts of the case are that the complainant Sukhjinder Singh gave his statement to the police that his daughter Navneet Kaur was married with Lovepreet Singh on 08.04.2022. He had spent huge money on the reception of Bharat. He had given gold ornaments, shagun and household articles consisting of bed, fridge, washing machine, utensils, A.C. and clothes etc and had spent Rs.35 lacs on marriage. The husband Lovepreet Singh, father-in-law Daljeet Singh and mother-in-law Balwinder Kaur were unhappy with the dowry articles. They were harassing his daughter by saying that she did not bring Verna car in dowry. She was beaten up in the matrimonial home. On 13.09.2022 Lovepreet Singh husband started quarreling with his daughter and on this, his daughter informed him. He went to the house of his daughter where
-2Lovepreet Singh, Daljeet Singh and Balwinder Kaur got angry regarding his arrival in the house. Lovepreet Singh and his mother Balwinder Kaur caught hold of him and Daljeet Singh gave brickbat blow towards his head which hit above his right eye. He gave another brickbat blow which hit on his right eyelashes. Balwinder Kaur gave him kick blow. His daughter raised alarm for help and upon which their neighbour reached there. He was taken to Civil Hospital in his car and was further referred to PGI Chandigarh. He was discharged from the Hospital on 24.09.2022. The common relative tried to effect compromise but it failed. Ultimately the matter was reported to the police.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that he is falsely involved in this case. The other co-accused Balwinder Kaur i.e. his wife was granted interim bail by learned Special Court-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur. Copies of orders are Annexures P-2 and P-3. His anticipatory bail application was wrongly declined. Even Lovepreet Singh husband has been granted interim bail by the said Court. He is also ready to join the investigation. No offence under Section 498-A, 323, 325 and 34 IPC is made out. All the allegations levelled against him are false in order to put pressure upon them. He is not likely to abscond. It is prayed that his anticipatory bail application may be allowed. 4.
The bail application is opposed by learned counsel representing the State as well as learned counsel representing the complainant. The status report has been filed. The present petitioner was specifically named. He had aimed two brickbat blows on the person of complainant as a result of which he suffered two injuries on his right eye. The copy of MLR of injured Sukhjinder Singh is Annexure R1 and the
-3medico-legal case summary issued by Senior Resident, Department of Plastic Surgery, PGIMER, Chandigarh is Annexure R-2. Considering the gravity of offence the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. The learned counsel representing the complainant has also placed on record the photographs of the complainant showing the injury received by the complainant.
5.
I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record. The present petitioner is the father-in-law of the girl who was being harassed and allegedly ill treated in the matrimonial home. The FIR was registered on the statement of the victim i.e. Sukhjinder Singh injured. The facts of the case referred above indicate that when the complainant had gone to the matrimonial home of his daughter, he was given brickbat blows by the present petitioner. The status report shows that the complainant had suffered serious injuries on his eye. The medical history along with opinion of the Doctor of PGI Chandigarh is also placed on record. The injury on the eye was declared grievous in nature. Considering the facts of the case and the role attributed to him, I do not find a fit case for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner Daljit Singh and the same is, accordingly, declined.
17.04.2023 (AMARJOT BHATTI) snd JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No.
Whether reportable:
Yes/No