IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.72721-M of 2006 DATE OF DECISION:19.02.2007 Arvind Kant Goyal ..........Petitioner Versus Nisha Rani ..........Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Shri AS Virk, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent. **** Petitioner Arvind Kant Goyal apprehending his arrest in a complaint case titled as Nisha Rani Versus Arvind Kant Goyal & Ors. for the offences punishable under Sections 406/498-A, has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of the FIR. As per office report, service is complete. But no one is present on behalf of the respondent. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was married to the complainant in the year 1985 and from this wedlock, four children were born. Two of the children, who are the daughters are living with the petitioner, whereas, the other two children, who are the sons are living with the complainant. Counsel contends that in a private complaint under Sections 406/498-A IPC, the petitioner has been summoned. Counsel for the petitioner further contends that in view of the order dated 21.11.2006, the petitioner has appeared before the trial Court on 25.11.2006 and has furnished his bail bonds, which have been Crl. Misc. No.72721-M of 2006 -2- accepted and attested and since then he is regularly appearing before the trial Court. Counsel for the petitioner has also placed on record a certificate copy of the said order. In view of the above, the interim bail, granted vide order dated 21.11.2006 is made absolute. Disposed of accordingly. February 19, 2007 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) pooja JUDGE