← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/9754/2020dismissed

Pooja Rani v. State Of Haryana

2020-05-20Mr. Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (I) POOJA RANI .....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA .....Respondent (II) MANDEEP ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ....Respondent Date of Decision:20.5.2020 **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL ****

Present:

Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners in CRM-M-9754-2020.

Mr.Vikas Lochab, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-11817-2020.

Mr. Deepak Sabherwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

Mr. K.D. Sehra, Advocate for the complainant in CRM-M-9754-2020.

Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, Advocate for the complainant in CRM-M-11817-2020.

****

( 2 ) GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J. (ORAL) 1.

This order shall dispose of the aforementioned two petitions filed on behalf of petitioners seeking anticipatory bail in respect of case registered against them vide FIR No.11 dated 15.1.2020 under Sections 306/34 IPC at Police Station Kharkhoda, District Sonepat. 2.

The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Rajesh husband of petitioner-Pooja Rani, wherein it has been alleged that his marriage with Pooja Rani was solemnized on 6.5.2013 but said Pooja Rani used to torture him since the very inception of marriage and used to threaten his father to involve him in a false case. It is alleged that Pooja Rani used to abuse the entire family of the complainant in the presence of the neighbours and threatened that she would ruin the life of the complainant and of his entire family. It is further stated therein that although the complainant discussed the matter with family of Pooja Rani but to no avail. It is further stated therein that Pooja Rani's brother Bhupinder and her cousin brother Mandeep @ Sonu also used to threaten to kill the complainant and other members of his family.

It is further alleged by the complainant that about two days back his wife had quarreled with his father and had threatened to involve him in a false case and that his father being fed up with the said threats committed suicide on 14.1.2020 and had also left a suicide note to this effect.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-Pooja Rani has submitted that she has falsely been implicated in the present case and that it is unbelievable that

( 3 ) a lady would have threatened her in-laws leading to commission of suicide by her father-in-law.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-Mandeep has submitted that in any case the suicide note allegedly left by the deceased does not refer to petitioner-Mandeep and in these circumstances, the petitioner in any case deserves the concession of bail.

5.

Opposing the petitions, learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioners are specifically named in the FIR, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out particularly since the deceased in his suicide note has specifically named Pooja Rani being the cause of his suicide. 6.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. Keeping in view the fact that there are specific allegations against Pooja Rani to the effect that she had issued threats to her father-in-law and other members of her matrimonial family and that deceased had specifically named Pooja Rani in suicide note, no case for grant of anticipatory bail to Pooja Rani is made out. The application on her behalf is dismissed. 7.

As far as the case of the petitioner-Mandeep (in CRM-M-11817-2020) is concerned, although he is named in the FIR being cousin of petitioner -Pooja Rani but there is no reference of his name in the suicide note. In these circumstances, his case is on different footing and as such can be extended the concession of anticipatory bail. The application on behalf of petitioner-Mandeep is accepted and it is ordered that the petitioner in the event of his arrest shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of

( 4 ) Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Arresting/Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. bail.

( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) 20.5.2020 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No