Jatin Dang v. State Of Punjab And Another
CRM-M-44414-2022 (O&M)
!" !# JATIN DANG $ % STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER & '
(
(
(
( )*( + + ( )*( + + ( )*( + + ( )*( + + ( $ ($ + , -.'/$0& $ ($ 1, 2$3$+ -0.
., 43 ($ ,$0$
.'/$$ & ' ( . ( . ( . ( .
(
(
(
(!"!5 !"!5 !"!5 !"!5!# !# !# !# Learned counsel for applicant/petitioner has filed an application for placing on record reply to the application filed by respondent No.2. Learned counsel for the State submits that he has no objection to the application being allowed. For the reasons mentioned in the application and no objection suffered by State counsel, application is allowed and accompanied document i.e. reply is taken on record, subject to just exceptions.
(
(
(
(565 565 565 565!7 !7 !7 !7 Learned counsel for applicant/respondent No.2 has filed an application for placing on record documents (Annexure R2/1 to R2/13).
Learned counsel for the State as well as petitioner's counsel submits that he has no objection to the application being allowed. For the reasons mentioned in the application and no objection suffered by State counsel as well as petitioner's counsel, application is allowed and accompanied documents are taken on record as Annexures R2/1 to R-2/13, subject to just exceptions. ( ( ( ( 1.
Petitioner has filed instant petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.230 dated 02.09.2022 under Sections 406 and 498-A of IPC registered at Police Station Division No.6, District Ludhiana. 2.
Facts of the case are, complainant Indu Bala @ Tanvi filed written complaint against her husband Jatin Dang and others alleging that her marriage was performed on 03.05.2014 according to sikh rites. Her mother and elder brother had spent huge money on her marriage. They had given dowry articles as detailed in the list of dowry articles. Said dowry articles were entrusted to the accused persons as her istridhan but despite her demand, she was not permitted to use the same. Soon after marriage, accused persons started maltreating her that she has not brought sufficient dowry and gold jewellery as per their expectations. She was taunted and maltreated by her husband and other members of in-laws family. She was also subjected to mercilessly beating. There was no change in their attitude. She gave birth to a daughter on 21.03.2015 at Ludhiana Nursing Home. All expenses were borne by her mother and brother. They had given customary gifts including gold ornaments. They openly proclaimed that they were
5 expecting a son and they treated her daughter as extra liability. She was beaten up several times. She again gave birth to another daughter on 16.09.2019 at Satyam Hospital, Ludhiana with major surgery. Again her family members incurred all the expenses. Her in-laws' family was unhappy on the birth of second daughter. They started demand for cash of Rs.50,000/- from her brothers. When she expressed her inability to bring this amount she was given mercilessly beating and was admitted in Civil Hospital Ludhiana by her brothers. A compromise was effected but there was no change in their behaviour. They again raised demand for cash of Rs.1 lakh from her brothers and on her refusal she was given merciless beatings. She also levelled allegations against Anil Dang for outraging her modesty. She was again taken to Civil Hospital, Ludhiana for medical treatment. Finally, matter was reported to the police. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that matrimonial dispute started due to temperamental differences. All the allegations levelled against him are false. Matter was compromised and it was decided to reside separately in rented accommodation but even that could not be worked out. Petitioner was granted interim bail vide order dated 21.11.2022 and in pursuance of this he has already joined the investigation and handed over the dowry articles. He is still ready to abide by the terms of bail order and will join the investigation as and when required. 4.
Bail petition is opposed by learned counsel representing respondent No.2. It is pointed out that complainant was given beatings several times and she was hospitalized. She was continuously ill-treated in the matrimonial home. Dowry articles which are recovered in this case are
7 in broken conditions. Photographs of the dowry articles are Annexure R1 to R12. Considering the gravity of offence and specific allegations, petitioner is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 5.
Learned counsel representing State filed status report confirming the facts detailed in the FIR. It is pointed out that dowry articles were recovered as per recovery memo dated 26.11.2022 (Annexure R-1) and the said memo was duly signed by the complainant. Learned State counsel opposed the stand taken by the counsel for respondent No.2 that dowry articles were given to the complainant in broken condition. This objection has been raised after the lapse of 11⁄2 years and the same is not justified. 6.
I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record carefully. Petitioner has joined the investigation in pursuance of interim bail order dated 21.11.2022. It is rightly pointed out that dowry articles were recovered vide recovery memo (Annexure R-1) dated 26.11.2022 and both the pages were duly signed by the complainant and at that time she never objected that said articles were given in broken condition nor any protest was raised at that time. Allegations and counter allegations are matter of trial. Petitioner is not required for any other purpose. Therefore, no purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars. In light of this, interim bail already granted in favour of petitioner vide order dated 21.11.2022 is confirmed subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.
7.
Petition is, accordingly, allowed.
# " ' -8 99 , &&9 :
;. <. '' & ' $' -9< 299 :( ;
:( ;
:( ;
:( ; !" !# !" !# !" !# !" !#
' =00$ &> -?$ '
? =00$$&$39
?