SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Yugraj Dhamija vs State Of Punjab on 16 January, 2018

Crl. Misc. No. M-33766 of 2015 (OM) [ 1 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Crl. Misc. No. M-33766 of 2015 (OM)
Date of Decision : January 16, 2018

Yugraj Dhamija ……………………………………….Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ……………………………………… Respondent

CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Ms. Seena Mand, DAG, Punjab.

Ms. G.K.Mann, Advocate
for the complainant.

LISA GILL, J. (Oral)

Petitioner seeks the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR

No.62 dated 17.06.2015 under Sections 498-A, 506, 354, 34 IPC, offence

under Section 406 IPC added later on, registered at Police Station

Gidderbaha, District Mukatsar.

It was stated before this Court on 23.12.2015 that the

petitioner is ready and willing to amicably resolve the dispute with the

complainant-wife. The matter was accordingly sent to the Mediation and

Conciliation Centre However, mediation between the parties failed. It was

thereafter expressed that the matter could still be resolved between the

parties. On request, the matter was yet again placed before the Mediation

Conciliation Centre of this Court. However, mediation proceedings failed

again and the matter was listed for arguments on 09.10.2017. The following

order was passed on 09.10.2017:-

1 of 3
26-01-2018 21:14:55 :::
Crl. Misc. No. M-33766 of 2015 (OM) [ 2 ]

“The petitioner as well as the complainant, duly identified by
their counsel, are present in Court. It is expressed by the
complainant that she is amenable to part ways with the
petitioner in case a sum of `8 lakhs is handed over to her as
full and final settlement of all her claims qua the petitioner
especially keeping in view the fact that her father has now
suffered a paralytic attack. The petitioner, however, offers a
sum of `6 lakhs and states that he cannot furnish anything
beyond that sum.

List on 04.12.2017.

At this stage, it is submitted by the complainant that arrears of
maintenance have not been deposited by the petitioner.

The petitioner present in Court states that he would hand over
a sum of `1,50,000/- i.e. the arrears of maintenance, which
according to him, are due towards the complainant on the next
date of hearing.”

The petitioner on 04.12.2017 furnished a sum of `32,000/-

instead of `1,50,000/- as arrears of maintenance. It was submitted that the

petitioner had come to Court but he was not present when the matter was

taken up for hearing. This case was again adjourned to enable the petitioner

to abide by his undertaking. However, the petitioner has failed to carry out

his undertaking before this Court on 09.10.2017. He is not present in Court

and his counsel has no instructions in this regard.

In the circumstances as above it is clear that the petitioner has

tried to misuse the concession of interim bail afforded to him.

Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that despite best

efforts the petitioner has not come forward. She seeks to withdraw this

petition.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

( LISA GILL )
16.01.2018 JUDGE
rupi

Note: Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable: Yes / No

2 of 3
26-01-2018 21:14:56 :::
Crl. Misc. No. M-33766 of 2015 (OM) [ 3 ]

3 of 3
26-01-2018 21:14:56 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Rules of Group, If You agree then Message us on Above Number.

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh