Crl.M.No.M-29859 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-29859 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:October 8, 2010 Deepak Kukkar .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.J.S.Toor, Advocate for the petitioner. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.124, dated 22.6.2010, under Sections 302/34 IPC, later on converted to under Section 306 IPC, registered at Police Station City Muktsar. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Muktsar, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed. Petitioner is husband of deceased. As per the complaint, brief allegations are that on receiving telephonic call from the deceased, father of deceased, i.e., complainant had gone to see his daughter at the house of petitioner and she told him that her husband Deepak, i.e., the present petitioner, had given her frooty by mixing some poison in the same with intention to kill her. She became unconscious. Complainant alongwith father-in-law of the deceased removed her to Madho Hospital, Muktsar and from there she was taken to Adesh Hsopital, Muktsar, where she died. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- accused that lateron the offence has been converted from Section 302 IPC to Section 306 IPC. It is also contended that an affidavit has also been filed by the complainant lateron that petitioner or any other family member has no Crl.M.No.M-29859 of 2010 (O&M) -2- hand in the death of his daughter. There are serious allegations against the petitioner-accused. He is trying to pressurise the complainant and allegedly obtained some affidavit from him in his favour, whereas in the FIR complainant had specifically stated that deceased told him that petitioner-accused had given her poison. It is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner- Deepak Kukkar for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit. 8.10.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge