High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/9916/2016dismissed

Dev Kaur v. State Of Punjab

2016-03-21Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-9916 of 2016 Date of decision: 21.03.2016 Dev Kaur ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ..Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment? Yes/No

2. To be referred to reporters or not? Yes/No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No

Present:

Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.95 dated 24.11.2015 registered under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code at Police Station Mullanpur Garibdass, District Mohali.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Navneet, has approached this Court by way of filing Criminal Misc. No. M-4321 of 2016 wherein notice of motion has been issued and interim order has also been passed. The petitioner has been implicated in the case on the basis of general and vague allegations without assigning any specific role and no date as NEETU RANI 2016.03.23 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Criminal Misc. No. M-9916 of 2016 well as time has been mentioned. Learned counsel also submits that no complaint was ever made by the deceased prior to her death against the petitioner.

Heard arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and have also perused the allegations levelled in the FIR. Admittedly, the death took place within one year of the marriage. The petitioner is mother-in-law of the deceased. No doubt allegations of harassment for demand of dowry are there and co-accused of the petitioner, who is sister-in-law, was granted interim bail because there was no reason for her to demand dowry. The petitioner cannot claim parity with the co-accused, who has been released on interim bail.

Keeping in view the nature of offence and the allegations levelled in the FIR and also the fact that it was a case of unnatural death as the death occurred within one year of the marriage, no ground is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Dismissed.

21.03.2016 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE NEETU RANI 2016.03.23 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh