IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-34997 of 2011 Date of decision : December 08, 2011 Emmanuel Eric ....Petitioner versus State of Haryana ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. KS Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Mr. MS Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Anil Kumar, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana Mr. Vikas Tomar, Advocate, for the complainant L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Accused Emmanuel Eric has filed this petition for anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 273 dated 21.10.2011, under sections 498-A, 406, 323, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station DLF Phase-II, Gurgaon. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Petitioner is husband of the complainant. The FIR lodged by the complainant is very lengthy levelling allegations against the petitioner and his parents. The petitioner is alleged to be addicted to drinks and torturing the complainant and also having extra marital relationship. He has also kept ornaments of the complainant in his locker and also other articles with him. Criminal Misc. No. M-34997 of 2011 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner has not operated the locker since the year 2009 and the locker may be operated to take out whatever ornaments are there. Learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the complainant vehemently contended that articles including ornaments of the complainant are to be recovered from the petitioner. I have carefully considered the rival contentions. In view of serious allegations made in plenty in the FIR against the petitioner who is husband of the complainant and is primarily responsible for her safety, security and protection and since dowry articles are to be recovered but without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the case, in my considered opinion, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Dismissed. ( L.N. Mittal ) December 08, 2011 Judge 'dalbir'