202 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M- 12088 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : January 30, 2018
Himanshu Singla …..Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ….Respondent
Criminal Misc. No. M- 2793 of 2017 (OM)
Narinder Kumar Singla …..Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ….Respondent
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. A.G.S. Dhillon, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Seena Mand, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Siddharath Gupta, Advocate
for respondent No. 2/complainant.
***
LISA GILL, J.
This order shall decide Criminal Misc. Nos. M- 12088 and
2793 of 2017. For convenience, facts are extracted from Criminal
Misc. No. M- 12088 of 2017.
Prayer in these petitions is for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioners in FIR No. 0056 dated 18.11.2016 under Sections
406/498A IPC registered at Police Station Women Cell, Bathinda,
District Bathinda.
It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely
implicated in this case. Petitioner – Himanshu Singla is the husband
1 of 4
04-02-2018 15:44:06 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 12088 of 2017 (OM) -2-
and Narinder Kumar Singla is the father-in-law of the complainant.
Marriage between the petitioner – Himanshu Singla and the
complainant was solemnised on 28.11.2010. It is stated that the
complainant was subjected to ill-treatment and harassment from the
very beginning on account of bringing insufficient dowry. Various
demands of dowry were raised by the petitioners and other family
members. The complainant stated that she was forced to stay away
from the matrimonial home from January, 2014 to July, 2014. Rs. 2
lakhs was given to the accused and the complainant was brought back
to the matrimonial home but it transpired that this was done only
because her younger brother-in-law was to be married. Ultimately, the
complainant, it is stated, was thrown out of the matrimonial home on
25.08.2016 after being physically abused as well on the said date.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
allegations in the FIR are absolutely incorrect. There is nothing on
record to show any kind of ill-treatment meted out to the complainant
from 2010 till the lodging of the FIR in question. In reality, the
problem started when the younger brother of Himanshu Singla got
married in August, 2016. The petitioners have always offered for
resumption of matrimonial ties but the complainant has refused. The
petitioner – husband had expressed his readiness and willingness to
take up a residence, separate and away, from his family and cohabit
with the complainant. He further agreed to deposit some amount by
way of FDR as security of sorts for the complainant, if she agreed to
2 of 4
04-02-2018 15:44:07 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 12088 of 2017 (OM) -3-
come and reside with him. However, the complainant has not come
forward to accept the proposal. It is submitted that the petitioners
undertake to face the proceedings and not to misuse the concession of
anticipatory bail, if afforded to them It is, thus, prayed that these
petitions be allowed.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI
Jagdev Singh, verifies that the petitioner – Narinder Kumar Singla has
joined investigation, however, petitioner – Himanshu Singla has not
joined investigation.
Learned counsel for the petitioners points out that as there
was no specific direction by this Court nor he was called upon by the
investigating agency, therefore, petitioner – Himanshu Singla has not
joined investigation. However, he undertakes to join investigation as
and when required by the investigating agency. There is no denial by
the State that the petitioner was not called upon to join investigation.
There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the
petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade
the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.
No useful purpose shall be solved by taking the petitioners in custody.
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 these petitions. Consequently,
order dated 30.01.2017 passed in CRM-M-2793 of 2017 is made
3 of 4
04-02-2018 15:44:07 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 12088 of 2017 (OM) -4-
absolute and in the event of arrest of the petitioner – Himanshu Singla
(in CRM-M-12088 of 2017) he shall be released on bail to the
satisfaction of Investigating Officer/ Arresting officer. He shall appear
before the Investigating agency as and when required. Petitioner shall
comply with the conditions stipulated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(Lisa Gill)
January 30, 2018 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
04-02-2018 15:44:07 :::