Crl.M.No. M-24473/2010(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No. M-24473/2010(O&M) Date of decision:29.11.2010. Ravinder Bharti ....................Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.NS Shekhawat,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Mahabir Sindhu, Addl.AG Haryana Mr.MK Tanwar,Advocate for the complainant. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Petitioner-husband has filed the instant petition under Section 438 Cr.PC for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.158 dated 21.7.2010 under Sections 498-A, 406,506,34 IPC, PS Kanina, Distt.Mahindergarh. At the time of issuance of notice of motion vide order dated 23.8.2010, it was submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is working in Army Canteen at Delhi and false allegations have been levelled at the instance of the father of the complainant-wife. It was also submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to maintain his wife to the best of his ability. Accordingly, petitioner-husband and complainant wife were directed to remain present in Court. Crl.M.No. M-24473/2010(O&M) 2 In pursuance to the order dated 23.8.2010, complainant wife Sushma Sharma and the petitioner husband came present on 15.10.2010 and vide order of even date, in order to explore the possibility of amicable settlement of the matrimonial dispute, both of them were directed to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre. As per report of the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, mediation proceedings could not fructify and the matter has been received back. Today, the complainant is present in Court and states that she is not interested to resume cohabitation. On the other hand, petitioner states that he is still willing and ready to maintain the complainant. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that all the dowry articles have been returned. In addition to that, at the time of consideration of bail application of father-in-law of the complainant, Rs.20,000/- were paid to the complainant for the remaining articles, if any and the same were accepted by the counsel for the complainant without any protest. Reference has been made to order dated 12.8.2010 (P5) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul whereby anticipatory bail was granted to the father-in-law. The aforesaid factual position has not been disputed by the learned State counsel, who on instructions from HC Jaswant Singh states that the petitioner has joined investigation and nothing is to be Crl.M.No. M-24473/2010(O&M) 3 recovered. In view of the above, interim protection/bail granted vide order dated 23.8.2010 is made absolute. Petition stands disposed of. 29.11.2010 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge