IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on: 09.02.2018
Sube Singh …. Petitioner
State of Haryana ….. Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. Namit Khurana, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. R.K. Ambavta, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. J.S. Chahal, Advocate,
for the complainant.
LISA GILL, J (ORAL)
The petitioner seeks the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR
District Yamuna Nagar.
It is submitted that marriage between the petitioner and the
complainant was solemnized on 12.11.2008. It was the second marriage of
both the parties. The petitioner’s first wife had passed away and he has two
children from the first marriage. The complainant had sought divorce from
her first husband after one year of marriage and thereafter solemnized
marriage with the petitioner.
It is further submitted that one of the grievances raised by the
complainant in the FIR is that their marriage was not registered by the
petitioner. The petitioner even as on date is ready and willing to have the
marriage registered and has always treated the complainant as his wife and
has afforded due respect and regard to her. The petitioner never raised any
1 of 2
04-03-2018 10:25:27 :::
such protest since their marriage in the year 2008 till the submission of her
application dated 26.09.2016 on the basis of which the above said FIR was
registered. It is thus prayed that this petition be allowed.
The petitioner and the complainant duly identified by their
counsel are present in Court. The matter was placed before the Mediation
and Conciliation Centre of this Court, but mediation was unsuccessful. It is
stated that even as on date, the petitioner is ready and willing to resume
matrimonial ties with the complainant. However, the complainant has
refused to resume matrimonial ties due to the unsavoury atmosphere created
by the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Jagjit
Singh, verifies that the petitioner has joined investigation and is not
involved in any other criminal case. There are no allegation on behalf of the
State that he is likely to abscond. No useful purpose shall be served by
taking the petitioner in custody.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is considered
just and expedient to allow this petition. Consequently, order dated
03.05.2017 is made absolute.
None of the observations made here-in-above shall be
construed to be a reflection on merits of the case and shall have no bearing
( LISA GILL )
Dinesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
04-03-2018 10:25:29 :::