Sat Parkash And ANR v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-26679-2015 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26679-2015 (O&M).

Decided on: August 12, 2015.

Sat Parkash and another ..... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana ..... Respondent(s) * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT Mr.R.S.Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioners.

M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL) Counsel for the petitioners contends that there are vague and uncertain allegations against both the petitioners in a case registered at the instance of Singh Raj complainant alleging that his daughter Rakhi married to the son of the petitioners on 16.5.2011 had been maltreated resulting in her death.

With the assistance of counsel for the petitioners, I have gone through the contents of the FIR. The allegation against petitioner No.1 is that he had told the deceased to bring a sum of Rs.5 lacs whereas petitioner No.2 demanded gold ornaments for her. The lady had died within a period of 7 years of marriage. There being specific allegations against the petitioners, I do not find any ground to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the son of the petitioners is already in custody and that in view of said

CRM-M-26679-2015 (O&M) circumstances, the liberty of the petitioners be protected. I have considered the said contention. Merely because the son of the petitioners is in custody is no ground to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. It is claimed that petitioner No.2 being a lady can be granted the concession of pre-arrest bail. In the capacity as lady, it will be open to her to seek concession of regular bail by seeking benefit of proviso to Section 437 Cr.P.C.

Dismissed.

(M.M.S. BEDI) August 12, 2015.

JUDGE rka RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2015.08.14 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document