Preet Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 24.01.2023 PREET SINGH ....Petitioner Vs.

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent

CORAM:-HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI

Present:

Mr. R.K. Arya, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kunwarbir Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the complainant.

***** AMARJOT BHATTI, J. (Oral) The petitioner - Preet Singh has filed the instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.0068 dated 03.09.2021 under Section 498-A and 406 IPC registered at Police Station Bhaini Mian Khan, District Gurdaspur.

The facts of the case are that Sukhwinder Kaur - complainant filed written complaint to SSP, Gurdaspur against her husband and in-laws family alleging that her marriage was solemnized with Preet Singh on 03.07.2018 according to Sikh rituals. She is having two daughters out of this wedlock. At the time of marriage, her parents had given dowry articles

-2consisting of refrigerator, LCD, cooler, motorcycle, washing machine, almirah etc. Her husband was doing labour work and was habitual drunkard. He was unhappy with the dowry articles. He used to taunt her and harass her for bringing less dowry. After the birth of elder daughter, the behaviour of her in-laws became bad to worse. They wanted a male child in the family. She gave birth to another daughter. Her brother-in-law was keeping bad eye on her. Ultimately, she was turned out of the matrimonial home along with her daughters. Now, she is residing in her parental house.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the allegations levelled against him are false. He has already joined the investigation as directed by this Court vide order dated 23.09.2022. He is still ready to join the investigation. It is prayed that ad-interim bail granted in his favour may kindly be confirmed.

Learned counsel representing the State has placed on record one recovery memo dated 11.10.2021 vide which the dowry articles were recovered. It is confirmed that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and he is not required for any other purpose. I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record carefully. The petitioner has joined the investigation and in pursuance of this, the dowry articles as mentioned in the FIR are recovered as per recovery memo dated 11.10.2021. ASI Rakesh Kumar confirmed that the petitioner is not required for any other purpose. Therefore, no purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. He is still ready to abide by the terms of bail order. Therefore, the ad-interim bail already granted vide order dated 23.09.2022 to the petitioner - Preet Singh stands confirmed, subject to the conditions envisaged under Section

-3438(2) Cr.P.C.

The petition is, accordingly, accepted.

24.01.2023 (AMARJOT BHATTI) lalit JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No