IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M-6373 of 2019
Date of Decision: 07.05.2019
Joginder Kaur
…Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another
…Respondent(s)
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA

Present:- Mr. M.S. Atwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jagmohan Ghumman, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Rohiteshwar Singh, Advocate for respondent no.2.
*****

HARI PAL VERMA, J. (Oral)

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 438 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner in the event of her arrest in complaint case No.3 of 2009 under

Sections 406 and Section498-A IPC instituted on 30.09.2009 (Annexure P-1).

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the

petitioner is sister-in-law of respondent no.2 Jeet Kaur @ Rajwant Kaur.

Jeet Kaur had solemnized her marriage with the brother of the petitioner

namely Joginder Singh on 27.02.2018. Pursuant to the complaint filed by

respondent no.2 under Sections 406 and Section498A IPC, the petitioner was

summoned vide order dated 11.01.2010 and accordingly, she appeared

before the trial Court. But thereafter, she had gone abroad and vide order

dated 25.05.2015, the petitioner was declared as a proclaimed person. The

said order dated 25.05.2015 reads as under:-

1 of 2
13-05-2019 01:57:33 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-6373 of 2019 -2-

“File put up before me today being Duty Magistrate
since Ld. Illaqa Magistrate is availing maternity leave.
Accused Joginder Kaur has not turned up despite elapse of 30
days after due issuance of proclamation under Sectionsection 82
CrPC. Therefore, accused Joginder Kaur is declared
proclaimed person. Intimation be sent to the concerned police
station for making the entry in the relevant register. Now the
case stands adjourned to 1.8.2015 for post charge evidence of
the complainant.”

Vide order dated 11.02.2019 of this Court, ad-interim bail was

granted to the petitioner to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, however,

the petitioner was directed to join investigation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner says that pursuant to order

dated 11.02.2019, the petitioner has appeared before the trial Court and she

has been admitted on bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

In view of the submission made by counsel for the petitioner

that the petitioner has appeared before the trial Court and she has been

admitted on bail, this Court finds that the present petition has been

rendered infructuous.

Dismissed as infructuous.

However, the petitioner shall appear before the trial Court as

and when required unless exemption is granted to her.

May 07, 2019 ( HARI PAL VERMA )
AK JUDGE

Whether speaking / reasoned? Yes / No
Whether reportable? Yes / No

2 of 2
13-05-2019 01:57:34 :::