Ankit Singla v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRM-M-12463-2021 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-12463-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.01.2022 Ankit Singla ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others .......Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Rakeshinder Singh Sidhu, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Beant Singh Simar, Advocate, for the complainant. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) Matter has been taken up through video conferencing via Webex facility in the light of the Pandemic Covid-19 situation and as per instructions.

Prayer in the present petition is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No.12 dated 19.1.2021, registered under Sections 406/498-A IPC at Police Station City-II Malerkotla, District Sangrur.

Vide order dated 25.8.2021, the petitioner was granted interim protection on the undertaking given by the petitioner that he would pay medical expenses of the complainant-wife for her dialysis and the matter was adjourned to 1.12.2021. On the adjourned date, it was found that the petitioner had not paid even a penny to the complainant-wife for her treatment as per undertaking given by him. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned to 17.12.2021 on the assurance given by the petitioner that he would pay Rs.2 Lacs to the complainant-wife in her Bank account within a period of 15 days. Even that order was not complied with. On 17.12.2021, the matter was adjourned to 19.1.2022 with another opportunity to the SHARMILA DEVI 2022.01.21 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc

CRM-M-12463-2021 -2petitioner for complying with the order. Today also the situation remains the same.

However, learned counsel for the petitioner candidly admits that the petitioner is paying maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month in a case pending under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the submissions and submitted that in the litigation under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the petitioner is in arrears amounting to Rs.1,04,000/-. He submits that till date the petitioner has paid only Rs.20,000/-.

Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation.

Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that without effecting any recovery, challan has been presented and the petitioner has no respect and regards for the order passed by this Court. In view of the above, this Court finds that despite number of opportunities granted, the petitioner has not shown any interest in complying with the directions of this Court. Even though the petitioner has joined the investigation and challan has been presented, the conduct of the petitioner does not satisfy the Court to continue with any interim protection in his favour. The petition being devoid of any merits, is hereby dismissed. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 20.01.2022 JUDGE sharmila Whether Speaking/Reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No SHARMILA DEVI 2022.01.21 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc