Crl. Misc. No.M-23578 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-23578 of 2010 Date of Decision: August 16, 2010 Santosh …..Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) The petitioner is mother-in-law of complainant- Poonam who has been allegedly roped in a case of dowry. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and her husband had disinherited their son Sachin Sindhwani much prior to the lodging of FIR. It has been argued that the husband of the petitioner is not being challaned but the petitioner has been arraigned as an accused with a malafide intention. Crl. Misc. No.M-23578 of 2010 [2] I have heard counsel for the petitioner. In case there is no specific allegation against the petitioner as per the FIR, the report submitted under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. and in the shape of statement of the parties and other documents, it will always be open to the trial Court to discharge the petitioner. If there is no evidence against the petitioner, the trial Court will pass a speaking order at the time of framing of charges, taking into consideration all the pleas raised on behalf of the petitioner. It is observed that in case after passing a speaking order, the trial Court form an opinion that there is sufficient material against the petitioner to frame charges against her, in said eventuality, it will be open to the petitioner to file an application for exemption from personal appearance which may be allowed by the trial Court subject to any condition imposed upon the petitioner, being a lady. Disposed of. August 16, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE