Sanjeev Kumar v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-19973-2021 [ 1 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19973-2021 Date of Decision: 17.01.2022 Sanjeev Kumar..........................................Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab.......................................... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL ...

(through video conferencing)

Present:

Mr. Ashish Soi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Rajan Singh Dadwal, Advocate for the complainant.

...

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.7 dated 14.01.2021 under Sections 406, 498-A IPC registered at Women Police Station, Ludhiana.

As per report received from the Mediation & Conciliation Centre, the parties failed to amicably settle their dispute. Learned counsel inter alia contends that false and fabricated case has been foisted upon the petitioner by his wife i.e. the complainant. It has been submitted that the parties have been married for as long as 12 years and not even once prior to the registration of the FIR in question, there had been any complaint made with regard to the alleged harassment. It was also submitted that the bona fides of the petitioner were evident from the fact that he had filed a petition RUPINDER KAUR 2022.01.18 11:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, as he still wanted to iron out his

CRM-M-19973-2021 [ 2 ] differences with his wife and bring her back to the matrimonial home. Learned counsel further submits that in compliance of order dated 19.05.2021 the petitioner had joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. Therefore, the present petition be allowed.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Sukhdev Singh, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. She, however, submits that recovery of two gold rings and some clothes have not yet been effected from the possession of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer made by the counsel opposite for the grant of anticipatory bail to him in the wake of serious and specific allegations levelled in the FIR against the petitioner of subjecting the complainant-wife to beatings on a number of occasions. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. In the wake of the statement made by the learned State counsel and substantial recovery of the dowry articles having been effected, the instant petition is allowed and order dated 19.05.2021 is made absolute. ( MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) 17.01.2022 JUDGE rupi Note: Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable:

Yes / No RUPINDER KAUR 2022.01.18 11:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document