Sushil Kumar And Others v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26362-2019 Date of decision:29.11.2019 SUSHIL KUMAR AND OTHERS ....Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA .....Respondent **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL ****

Present:

Mr. Sube S. Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Ashok Singh Choudhary, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioners who are father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the complainant seek grant of anticipatory bail in respect of FIR No.122 dated 25.2.2019 under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station City Rohtak.

2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of complainant-Sonia wherein it has been alleged that her marriage was solemnized on 28.11.2014 with Parvesh and although her widowed mother had given sufficient dowry but her husband and other member of his family were not satisfied with the same and started harassing and even given beatings to her in order to press upon their demands of more dowry. It is alleged that although 'Panchayat' was also convened to reason out with the accused but to no avail.

GAURAV SOROT 2019.11.29 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

(2) CRM-M-26362-2019 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that they have falsely been implicated in the present case and all the allegations with regard to demand of dowry etc. have been cooked up simply to pressurize the husband and other members of his family.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioners are specifically named in the FIR, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. It has however been informed that the petitioners have since joined investigation.

5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and bearing in mind that it is a case which had arisen out of some matrimonial discord and that the petitioners have already joined investigation and are not required for custodial interrogation, the petition as such, is accepted and the interim directions issued vide dated 6.6.2019 by this Court are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioners would appear before Investigating Officer as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) 29.11.2019 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2019.11.29 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document