CRM-M No. 8682 of 2011(O&M) **** Satinder Singh v. State of Punjab and another Present: Mr.Ashok Giri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Gill, DAG, Punjab. Ms. Vanita Sapra Kataria, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No. 59 dated 24.02.2011, under Sections 406, 498-A, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Payal, District Ludhiana. On 22.03.2011 the following order was passed:- “ Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is ready to settle the dispute amicably either to live together or separate on such terms as may be acceptable to both the parties. He submits that on oral request, the complainant may be impleaded as respondent in the array of the parties. This prayer is accepted. The complainant is directed to be impleaded as respondent No.2 in the array of parties. Notice of motion for 18.4.2011. Arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed in order to explore possibility of amicable settlement of the dispute.” Thereafter the matter was referred to the Mediation Center but since mediation proceedings failed, the matter has been referred back. Today respondent No.2 has stated that there is no possibility of resuming the matrimonial relation in view of the cruelty to which she has been subjected. However, she would not be averse to a mutual parting of ways provided the petitioner returns her dowry articles and compensates her with regard to the marriage expenses, permanent alimony etc. Learned counsel CRM-M No. 8682 of 2011(O&M) -2- for the petitioner, on instructions from the petitioner, states that the petitioner is ready to pay a sum of Rs. 2 lacs. I find this to be grossly inadequate and abnormal. Parties have now been separated for one year and no maintenance has also been paid by the petitioner. Even despite the urging of learned counsel, the petitioner is not ready to budge even one inch. In view of this ridiculous offer, this Court has come to the reluctant conclusion that the petitioner made the original offer only to get an interim order without seriously intending to settle the dispute. In these circumstances I find no reason to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Petition is dismissed. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE October 13, 2011 sunita