Amandeep Chauhan @ Aman v. State Of Punjab And ANR

CRM-M-55338-2022 -12023:PHHC:073523

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-55338-2022 Date of decision : 19.05.2023 Amandeep Chauhan @ Aman ...... Petitioner V/S State of Punjab and Anr.

..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI

Present:

Mr. Mohit Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kunwarbir Singh, Assistant A.G. Punjab.

Mr. Manoj Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL) The petitioner-Amandeep Chauhan @ Aman has filed the instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 94 dated 28.06.2022, registered under Sections 494 and 498-A of IPC, at Police Station Jodhewal, District Ludhiana.

The facts of the case are that the complainant-Aaina Bhatt filed written complaint alleging that she got married with Amandeep Chauhan @ Aman on 06.12.2018. Her parents had given dowry in the shape of ornaments. Besides this, they had given Rs.3 Lacs in cash for furniture as demanded by the accused. After marriage, she came to know that her husband and in-laws family were unhappy with the dowry articles. They started harassing her on account of less dowry. She tolerated their behaviour to settle down in the matrimonial home. There was no change in their behaviour. During this period, she noticed that her husband was talking to some other girl on phone. All the accused threatened to kill her. Her husband wanted to give divorce to her so that he could marry another girl. SUNIL DEVI 2023.05.20 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-55338-2022 -22023:PHHC:073523 Ultimately, she filed the complaint on the basis of which present FIR has been registered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the allegations levelled against him are false. Now the matter has been compromised with the complainant and copy of settlement agreement is also placed on record. It is argued that the petitioner will abide by the terms of the bail order. Therefore, his anticipatory bail may be allowed.

The aforesaid facts are also confirmed by the counsel for the complainant. In view of this compromise, the bail application is also not opposed by learned State counsel.

I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record carefully. The petitioner has effected compromise with the complainant and copy of settlment agreement is also placed on record. He is still ready to join the investigation as and when required. Therefore, no purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars. In view of these facts, the anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner is allowed. He be not arrested. In case of his arrest, he be released on bail to the satisfaction of Investigation Officer/Arresting Officer subject to the conditions enshrined under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The petition is accordingly accepted.

(AMARJOT BHATTI ) JUDGE 19.05.2023.

Sunil Devi Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No SUNIL DEVI 2023.05.20 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment