SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Varsha Chhabra And Another vs State Of Haryana on 14 August, 2018

CRM-M-25490-2018 -1-


Date of decision: 14.08.2018

Varsha Chhabra and another
… Petitioners

State of Haryana
… Respondent

Present: Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Naveen Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Narender Kaajla, Advocate
for the complainant.


Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR

No.242 dated 04.05.2018 under Sections 323, 377, 406, 498A, 506 IPC read

with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Hisar Civil Lines, Hisar.

On 11.06.2018, following order was passed by this Court: –

“Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners

are parents-in-law of the complainant Daisy. Counsel for the

petitioners further submits that both the petitioners are senior

citizens and petitioner No.2, father-in-law of the complainant, is

an old patient of cancer. It is further submitted that as per

allegations in the FIR, there are no direct allegations of demand

1 of 3
16-08-2018 17:23:21 :::
CRM-M-25490-2018 -2-

of dowry and all the allegations are against husband of the

complainant. Counsel for the petitioners has further submitted

that the complainant was residing with her husband Yogesh at

Govindgarh, whereas the petitioners are residing at Chandigarh

and are separate in mess and residence.

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Naveen Sheoran, DAG,

Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State while

Mr. Narender Kaajla, Advocate has appeared on behalf of the


List again on 14.08.2018.

In the meantime, petitioners are directed to appear before

the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 days to join the

investigation and they will be released on interim bail on

furnishing bail/surety bonds subject to the following conditions: –

1. They will make themselves available for interrogation by a
police officer as and when required;

2. They will not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of
the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to
the Court or to any police officer; and

3. They will not leave India without previous permission of
the Court.”

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in pursuance of

the aforesaid order dated 11.06.2018, petitioners have joined the investigation

and are not required for any further investigation.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating

2 of 3
16-08-2018 17:23:21 :::
CRM-M-25490-2018 -3-

Officer, has not disputed the factual position and states that the petitioners are

no more required for any further investigation.

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail

granted to the petitioners vide order dated 11.06.2018 is made absolute subject

to the conditions envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

14.08.2018 JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether Reportable : Yes/No

3 of 3
16-08-2018 17:23:21 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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 read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation