260 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Criminal Misc. M- No. 8352 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : June 01, 2017
Anjum Sahid …..Petitioner
State of Haryana ….Respondent
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. Munfaid Khan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sanjay K. Saini, AAG, Haryana.
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer is for bail pending trial to the petitioner in FIR No. 256
dated 11.12.2015 registered under Sections 343, 366, 376D, 34 IPC at
Police Station Bahin, District Palwal.
It is submitted that the co-accused i.e. the father-in-law and the
brother-in-law of the complainant have been found innocent. It is only the
present petitioner, who is being proceeded against and he is admittedly the
complainant’s husband. Charge under Section 376 IPC has been framed
against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as there is no
dispute regarding the petitioner being the husband of the complainant,
sustainability of the charge under Section 376 IPC is doubtful. Furthermore,
the complainant had earlier lodged FIR No. 87 dated 21.10.2014 under
Sections 498A, 406, 506 IPC. Matrimonial discord between the complainant
and the petitioner is the cause of registration of the present FIR. The
petitioner is in custody since 08.05.2016. Moreover, the material witnesses
including the complainant have since deposed before the learned trial Court.
It is, thus, prayed that this petition be allowed.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Bharat
1 of 2
10-06-2017 15:51:18 :::
Criminal Misc. M- No. 8352 of 2017 (OM) -2-
Pal, Police Station Bahin does not deny that the allegations raised by the
complainant against her father-in-law and brother-in-law i.e. the father and
the brother respectively of the petitioner were found incorrect. It is only the
petitioner who is being proceeded against for the offence punishable under
Section 376 IPC. FIR No. 87 dated 21.10.2014 under Sections 498A, 406,
506 IPC is verified to be lodged by the complainant against her husband and
other family members. Learned counsel for the State affirms that after
presentation of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. charge has been
The trial, in this case, is not likely to conclude in the near
future. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is
likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from
deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. No useful purpose shall
be solved by keeping the petitioner incarcerated any longer. Keeping in
view the facts and circumstances noted above but without expressing any
opinion on the merits of case, it is considered just and expedient to allow
Consequently, the petitioner be released on bail pending trial
subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
It is reiterated that none of the observations made herein above
are a reflection on the merits of the case and shall have no bearing on the
June 01, 2017 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
10-06-2017 15:51:19 :::