Rohit Kumar v. State Of Punjab And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
!"
#$%
& '
(') *"%"+ , &$-.%/ %- %-" +
0 %
-1/2+ * .$*"!+ %&++"
#%$ .++3%-
!"
#
$ % ***** %&++"
#%$ .++3%-
.
& " '(% $
%)%* + ," "+-./$ 00 )1 )1 %)%' '1(2')3.45 (6*35%7 $ 7+ 4, +8 +
%
9for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The love marriage between the petitioner and complainant was solemnized on 27.04.2022 and out of the said wedlock, a daughter was born on 11.02.2023. After the marriage, the complainant was
Rs.52,000/- per month. As such, the complainant became independent and started having disputes with the petitioner. On 08.05.2024, the complainant had given beatings to the petitioner and regarding the said incident, petitioner made a complaint to the police, upon which DDR No.49 dated 09.05.2024 (Annexure P-2) was registered. + 88/ -./+ + :" , + "
",
*
" + +, ++ 4.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that even prior to the marriage, the petitioner-accused started making demands of money. After the marriage, there was a demand of Creta car and respondent No.2 got booked the said car by spending sum of Rs.25,000/- vide payment receipt (Annexure R-6). Apart from this, various payments had been withdrawn by respondent No.2 from the bank prior to the marriage and at many instances many payments had been sent to the petitioner by respondent No.2 (Annexures R-5, R-7 and R-8). 5.
After the marriage, respondent No.2 was physically assaulted and Medico Legal Report dated 18.09.2023 (Annexure R-1) was prepared by the Medical officer, Civil hospital, Moga. However, later on, the matter was compromised and respondent No.2 again started living in her matrimonial house. Ultimately, the petitioner persisted with the demand of Creta car and starting giving threats to respondent No.2 that he would solemnize marriage with someone
* else after getting divorce from her.
. parties at length and perused the relevant documents.
7.
No doubt, in a matrimonial dispute, efforts should always be made for reconciliation of the matter, however, in the present case there are various online transfers made by respondent No.2 in favour of the petitioner. 8.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has instructions that the petitioner wants to reconcile the matter, however, he has no instructions that any amount can be deposited in advance with the Registrar General of this Court to show bona fide of the petitioner.
9.
It is noticed that there was a history of physical assault, upon which medical examination of respondent No.2 was conducted and Medico Legal Report dated 18.09.2023 (Annexure R-1) has been appended along with the reply dated 23.10.2024 filed on behalf of respondent No.2. 10.
It is further noticed that despite having a physical assault in September 2023, the parties again started living together by reconciling the matter, however, the offer given by the petitioner that he is ready to compromise the matter does not appear to be genuine as he has already filed a divorce petition. There are specific allegations that there was a demand of Creta car and receipt (Annexure R-6) shows that payment of Rs.25,000/- was made for booking of the car by the respondent No.2. The said documentary evidence corroborates the oral contentions in the FIR.
11.
Keeping in view the fact that there are specific allegations regarding the demands having been made after the marriage and the previous history of physical assault, no ground is made out to grant concession of anticipatory bail to
' the petitioner.
12.
Consequently, the petition stands dismissed.
*
:+;
" "";
'
+
57 ,
%&++"
#%$ .++3%-
.$5+
< += >=$ Whether reportable Yes/No