202 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Criminal Misc. No. M-1771 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : February 01, 2018
Jagjiwan Singh …..Petitioner
State of Punjab and another ….Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. G.S. Pannu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Seena Mand, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Mandeep Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the
registered at Police Station Doraha, District Ludhiana.
It is submitted that the above said FIR was registered merely on
account of temperamental differences between the complainant and the
petitioner. All the other family members named in the FIR were found
innocent during investigation. It is submitted that the petitioner still wishes
for resumption of matrimonial ties and seeks to reside together with the
complainant and the minor child. All allegations of ill-treatment and
harassment as raised in the FIR are not substantiated by any kind of
evidence. It is argued that the complainant was never subjected to any kind
of ill-treatment, harassment or physical abuse in the matrimonial home.
Despite efforts, the complainant did not return to the matrimonial home
after the delivery of the child on 03.11.2015. The petitioner has joined
1 of 3
03-02-2018 23:49:14 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-1771 of 2017 (OM) -2-
investigation and undertakes to face proceedings. It is, thus, prayed that this
petition be allowed.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this petition
while submitting that specific allegations have been raised against the
It is noticed that the parties were referred to the Mediation and
Conciliation Centre of this Court but mediation was unsuccessful.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even as on date,
the petitioner seeks to resume matrimonial ties with the complainant. The
complainant, who is present in Court today, duly identified by her counsel,
submits that she is not ready and willing to reside with the petitioner at this
There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the
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.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI
Sukhdev Singh, verifies that the petitioner has joined investigation though it
is submitted that certain recoveries are yet to be effected. Be that as it may,
this Court in Prit Pal Singh versus State of Punjab and another 2014 (5)
RCR (Criminal) 771 observed that non recovery of certain articles cannot
be a ground for not affording the concession of anticipatory bail to the
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 this petition. Consequently, order dated 19.01.2017
2 of 3
03-02-2018 23:49:15 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-1771 of 2017 (OM) -3-
is made absolute.
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
February 01, 2018 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
03-02-2018 23:49:15 :::