Daljeet Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another
!"#$ %&'"
(")"*+ , -. +
!"
#$
%"& '
( )))) /+ *$ + " #$ $
$ % ,-.
''
#
/&
01( 2 2, % , ,2.
1'
. #
3
$
0 $#$$ &
$
3 !%#$ 4%
5
3 # $ $%& " #$ $ 3 3&
5 3
/
# #$$ 3 # 5
3 5 $ " #$
.
3 # $ 5 $
3
5/6 $%& " #$5$ # %
3 7
3 3 $ $ 5
3
& # 3 / 3 $ $ % $ 5& %3/ 3 $ %$ %
3$ 3 $ 3 6 3 $ 5%## & #3 /
3$ 3 $ $ & $ %
$ $%&5
&
5 $$ $ 5 $ % &%$
/$ # $ 3 $ 5$ 8 #$ 5$ $ 5
& 8 & 8 $ 3 $ 3 0
/ $
$ 5$
/ $ %
*$ 3 5 % $ 3
/$ 55
#-9 $ 3 5 $ $ 5$ 5 & 8 $ 3 $ 3 : $ %
$ $%& 5 3 #
3 3 $ & 3 # $
/
$
$ 5 3 $ $ $ &%$ & /
$
& % 3 $ $ 5
/ $ &/ $ $ 5 # 3
$ 3 $ $ & $
$
*$ 5
$3 $ 3 $ 3
%
$ 3 3 3 3 6 3 $
3
#$ & $
#
%/$ 5
# $ $
3$ 3 $ 3$ /*$
3 7 $ $ / &
# $ & $ ; $ $ 5 # 3
& #*$ 3
$ 5 3
/ /&/ / *$ $
$
# $ 5
3
/*$ 3 5
3 &%$ /# $
& $ %6 3 &
$ 5 $ $ 5
$ & /
8 $ 3$ $ % 6 $%&#
$ # / 3$ 3 $ 0
/ $ 5% %
$ 3 $ % &/ $ #$ $
< $$
# 01$& # 3.
Learned counsel for petitioner argued that all allegations of
- demand of dowry and maltreatment are false and without any basis. The matter was enquired by DSP, Amloh. The said report is Annexure P-1 and the allegations were found to be false. From the facts of the case, no offence under Section 406 of IPC is made out. There is no list of dowry articles. No recovery is to be effected from him. Learned counsel for petitioner levelled allegations against the complainant having extra marital affair with one Paramjit. Petitioner has already joined the investigation in compliance of order dated 05.09.2024. He is still ready to cooperate. It is prayed that his anticipatory bail application may be allowed. 4.
Bail petition is opposed by learned counsel representing State. Detailed status report has been filed. After proper enquiry, FIR was registered. Dowry articles are yet to be recovered. Present petitioner illtreated his wife in order to compel her to bring money from her parental house. Therefore, petitioner is required to join the investigation. Bail petition is also opposed by learned counsel representing respondent No.2/complainant taking the stand that complainant was continuously harassed during her entire stay in the matrimonial home. At the time of marriage, dowry articles in the shape of household articles, gold ornaments were given. The bills are annexed with the reply. The photograph of the complainant showing marks of injury on her face is Annexure R-2/2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant has annexed some of the photographs of marriage while giving gold ornaments and other customary gifts. All these articles are yet to be recovered. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 5.
I have considered the arguments and have gone through the
, record carefully. As per facts of the case, the complainant is living in her parental house on account of maltreatment given to her in the matrimonial home in order to compel her to bring money. The facts narrated in the FIR are clear as to how she was illtreated in the matrimonial home from time to time. Learned counsel for complainant has also annexed the photographs of marriage giving gold ornaments and other gifts to the family members of petitioner. Petitioner who is the husband was granted interim bail vide order dated 05.09.2024, even then he did not cooperate with the investigating agency for the recovery of dowry articles which is the case property in the case in hand. In order to complete the investigation, recovery of dowry articles is also material.
In the light of aforesaid factual position, I do not find a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and his anticipatory bail petition is accordingly declined.
6.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly as well. 0 1 <$ $ 8 #= > =( <$ $ & > =(