Crl.M.No. M-31144/2010 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl.M.No. M-31144/2010 Date of decision: 30.11.2010. Smt. Nirmal Nanda and others ....................Petitioners. v. The State of Punjab .....................Respondent. Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh. Present:- Mr. Gorakh Nath, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. R.S.Bajaj, Advocate for the complainant. Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral). Prayer under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of mother-in-law, unmarried Nanad and father-in-law of complainant-Neha, in case FIR No.132 dated 6.9..2010 under Sections 406/498-A IPC, P.S. Division No.1, Jalandhar. The marriage of the complainant Neha was solemnized with Amit Nanda on 2.2.2006 and a female child was born out of this wedlock on 27.11.2006. It is stated that the parties are now residing separately and the female child is with the husband-Amit Nanda. It is frurther stated that the trial Court had granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioners, however, on account of alleged non-recovery of gold ornaments, the same was dismissed on 21.10.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Crl.M.No. M-31144/2010 allegation of entire gold ornaments have not been returned is false. He submits that Additional Deputy Commissioner(E) City-I, Jalandhar has enquired into the allegations including non return of the gold ornaments and he vide his report dated 29.11.2010 observed that entire gold ornaments have been returned. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the situation as projected by the petitioners is incorrect. The gold articles have not been returned. Learned State Counsel on instructions from ASI Vijay Kumar states that except the dispute with regard to aforesaid gold ornaments, rest of the Istridhan is admittedly returned to the complainant party. He, however, agrees that Addl. Deputy Commissioner (E) City-I, Jalandhar has in his report found that gold articles have been returned. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the matter has been enquired by an officer of the rank of Additional Deputy Commissioner and found that entire gold ornaments have been returned and also the fact that the complainant is an educated girl and was residing separately with her husband at the time marriage had broken down, it is not expected that complainant has not taken her gold ornaments with her. It, however, is a matter of evidence at the stage of trial or other civil proceedings for recovery. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, Crl.M.No. M-31144/2010 interim protection/bail granted vide order dated 25.10.2010 is made absolute. Petition stands disposed of. 30.11.2010 (Jaswant Singh) Pka Judge