CRM No. M 17923 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 17923 of 2010 Date of decision: 17.11.2010 Amarjit Kaur and another ........ Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Viney Puri, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. P S Bajwa, DAG, Punjab for the respondent State Mr. Vikas Bali, Advocate for the complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No. 63 dated 10.06.2010 under Section 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioners had admitted that the dowry articles were with them but however, the same have not been returned. CRM No. M 17923 of 2010 2 On 30.09.2010, it was directed that the petitioners should returned the dowry/gold articles which are in their possession. It was also directed that the goods as recovered by the Investigating Officer be returned to the complainant under her signatures after making inventory of the same. On 14.10.2010, it was stated by the counsel for the complainant that the Investigating Officer has not handed over the articles as recovered by him in spite of the specific directions given by this Court. Investigating officer SI Tara Chand, who was present in Court undertook to hander over the said articles to the complainant before the next date of hearing. Today, a list of the dowry articles recovered by the I.O. and handed over to the complainant has been placed on record. Learned counsel for the complainant states that the gold articles are still with the petitioners. Whereas, it has been pointed by Mr. P S Bajwa, DAG, Punjab, on instructions from SI-Tara Chand that after due investigation, the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC stands deleted and the same has also been approved by the SSP concerned. It is still a matter of evidence as to whether any gold articles are in possession of the petitioners or not. At this stage, the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC stands deleted. It is also not disputed that the petitioners have joined the investigation. In view of above, the order dated 29.06.2010 passed by this Court is made absolute. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge November 17, 2010 mohan