In the Punjab and Haryana High Court, at Chandigarh. CRM-M- 22259 of 2011 Decided on Aug 23,2011 Naveen Kishore --Petitioner vs. State of Haryana --Respondent AND CRM-M- 22260 of 2011 Decided on Aug 23,2011 Neeraj Kishore --Petitioner vs. State of Haryana --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. N.D.Achint, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Sagar Deswal, AAG, Haryana. Rakesh Kumar Jain,J:(Oral) This order shall dispose of two petitions bearing CRM-M No.22259 of 2011 titled as Naveen Kishore Vs. State of Haryana and CRM-M No.22260 of 2011 titled as Neeraj Kishore Vs. State of Haryana, which have arisen out of FIR No.630 dated 02.11.2010 registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 304-B,34 IPC at Police Station City Gurgaon, wherein both the petitioners have prayed for concession of regular bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Neeraj Kishore (husband of the deceased ) was taken into custody on 16.2.1011, whereas Naveen Kishore Jeth of the deceased was taken into custody on 03.11.2010. CRM-M- 22259 of 2011 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the present FIR was registered on the statement of the complainant Gajender Parshad, who has not supported the case of the prosecution while appearing as PW1 and has turned hostile. Similarly, other witness, namely, Sunil Kumar (PW2) has also turned hostile. He further submits that the deceased had left behind a suicide note (Annexure P2 ) dated 1.12.2010 which shows that she was under great depression, as a result of which she had taken her life but the case had been registered by Gajender Parshad of dowry death in order to harass the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that initially the case was registered against three members of the family of the petitioners but later on after enquiry, only the petitioners herein were found to be involved in this case. He ,however, could not deny the fact that the star witnesses of the prosecution have already turned hostile and only the official witnesses are left to be examined. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case but without making any observations on the merit, both the petitions are allowed and the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. August 23,2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge