Attar Singh v. State Of Haryana

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : December 20, 2019 Attar Singh ....Petitioner versus State of Haryana ....Respondent Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh Present :

Mr. APS Deol, Senior Advocate with Mr. HS Deol, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms. Trishanjali Sharma, AAG, Haryana with ASI Sunder Lal Fateh Deep Singh, J. (Oral) The brief allegations of the prosecution in this case against accused petitioner Attar Singh are that he happens to be father of Rinku and father-in-law of deceased Reena. The marriage between the deceased and Rinku took place on 17.2.2019 where sufficient dowry articles were given. It is claimed that the husband and his family were not happy with the same and raised more demands. Though Tata Tiago (Tata) car was promised to be given

-2but the accused demanded i20 car (Hyundai) to which the family of the deceased showed their inability. It is while the husband was away on duty in a remote area being in Army, the deceased on 19.5.2019 consumed poisonous substance at her parental house leading to her death. The allegations against petitioner father-in-law are that he along with his co-accused husband of the deceased namely Rinku, his mother Kamla, sisters Anita, Rani and Meenu as well as their respective husbands were harassing the deceased for dowry and taunting her for the same and being not beautiful as well. The deceased had confided her ill-behaviour at the hands of the accused in her family. Eight ten days prior to this occurrence, the deceased had also informed telephonically about this ill treatment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter-alia contends that the husband was posted in a forward area and the petitioner happens to be an Ex-serviceman and there are no specific allegations against the petitioner in the commission of the offence. It is argued that the petitioner is behind the bars inspite of the fact that he is in advance age and the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future.

Learned State counsel has stoutly opposed the grant of bail on the grounds as to the seriousness of the offence. It is

-3contended that the calls made by the deceased during the last days of her life are illustrative of the immense pressure to which the deceased was put under and thus forcing her to take this unfortunate step. The State has shown apprehension that if allowed bail, there is every likelihood that the petitioner might stifle the trial. The deceased has died un-natural tragic death within approximately three months of her marriage. There are allegations of demand of dowry/car, torture and harassment levelled against the accused including the petitioner who happens to be the father-in-law. The apprehension of the State that if allowed bail, there is every likelihood of stifling the investigations and trial is not unfounded. In view of seriousness of the allegations this Court is not inclined to allow the bail which is dismissed at this stage. ( Fateh Deep Singh ) December 20, 2019 Judge 'tiwana'

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No Whether Reportable ?

Yes/No