Kulpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

[1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: October 06, 2015 Kulpreet Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

Present:

Ms.Himani Kapila, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.P.S.Ghuman, Addl.AG, Punjab.

Mr.Raman Goklaney, Advocate, for the informant.

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.(Oral) Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 438, Cr.P.C., is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Kulpreet Singh, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498-A, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.6, dated 19.02.2015, registered at Police Station, Women Cell, Ferozepur.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has joined the investigation; the informant-side had beaten the petitioner and that there would be no use for sending the petitioner behind the bars; that father of the petitioner is suffering from various ailments and there is no other male member in the family to look after his SEEMA RANI 2015.10.06 17:08 I attest the accuracy and authencity of the document

[2] father.

Learned counsel for the State submits that there are serious allegations of demand of dowry, harassment, beating and torture of the informant against the petitioner and his family members. Despite joining of the investigation by the petitioner, no dowry articles could be recovered and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would facilitate the Investigating Agency to unveil the real facts.

Learned counsel for the informant has toed the submissions of learned counsel for the State and added that the gravity of the offences committed by the petitioner would not permit this Court to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.

A perusal of the material available on record would reveal that before registration of the present case, the matter was inquired into several times and after finding a prima facie case against the petitioner, the present FIR was registered. There are specific allegations of harassment, torture and beating of the informant and demand of dowry. The petitioner, who is the husband, is main accused. The custodial interrogation would enable the Investigating Agency to bring the truth on surface.

[3] No ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out.

Dismissed.

Interim directions dated 27.03.2015 are hereby vacated.

October 06,2015 (Naresh Kumar Sanghi) seema Judge