Amninder Singh v. State Of Punjab And ANR.

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 24.08.2016 Amninder Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Anmol Grewal, AAG, Punjab.

Ms. Gurpreet Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in a case arising out of FIR No.130 dated 24.09.2015, registered at Police Station Khamanon, District Fatehgarh Sahib, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC.

Petitioner was married to the complainant in the year 2008. A child was born out from this wedlock, who is about 8 years old as of today. Petitioner is working as a Technical Officer in the Syndicate Bank whereas the complainant is teaching in a Government School as S.S. Mistress on contract basis. They resided at Morinda in a rented accommodation w.e.f.

-210.10.2009 to 26.04.2015, when the petitioner was transferred to Delhi. Before registration of the present FIR, a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was made on 16.11.2011 before the Illaqa Magistrate and thereafter a compromise has been effected on 05.03.2012 between the parties. However, their relationship did not improve. FIR was registered on 24.09.2015 (Annexure P-1) with the allegations that the petitioner has neglected his wife completely and did not visit to Morinda after being transferred to Delhi on 26.04.2015. The other details of the harassment have been given in FIR. On 08.12.2015, some dowry articles have been recovered from the house of the petitioner at Kharar. Learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute this recovery.

Vide order dated 29.12.2015, the anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner, as he was willing to settle the disputes with the complainant. The parties were directed to appear before the mediation centre of this Court by way of order dated 02.02.2016. As per the report of the mediator dated 15.03.2016, the parties have not been able to resolve their disputes.

Today, the matter heard at length and it has been transpired that there is a dispute with regard to recovery of gold ornaments. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the gold ornaments are in the custody of the complainant, as the petitioner does not have any gold ornaments as of today. At the same time, learned counsel for the complainant states that all the articles which were given by family members of the complainant to the petitioner was never handed over to her.

In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, order dated 29.12.2015, passed by this Court whereby the ad-interim

-3anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of `7 lacs as security before the trial Court. The petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the conditions as envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of. August 24, 2016 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No