IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P.(M) No.557 of 2008 Decided on: July 24, 2008. Satpal Singh & Anr. …Petitioners. VERSUS State of Himachal Pradesh ….Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioners: Mr Ajay Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr Anshul Bansal, Addl.A.G. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral) This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioners on bail in F.I.R.No.130 registered on 27.5.2008 at Police Station, Haroli, District Una under Sections 498- A, 506 and 34 I.P.C. 2. The brief facts are that on the complaint of Smt.Neetu Singh wife of Dinesh Kumar, F.I.R. No.130 was registered on 27.5.2008 at Police Station, Haroli. According to the complainant, she was married to Dinesh Kumar who started harassing her by giving beatings and abusing her unnecessarily. It has been alleged that her husband has kept another woman Shreshta Devi. She has alleged that her in-laws and brother-in-law Manish Kumar also assist her husband Dinesh Kumar in committing illegal acts. The Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes …2… complainant was medically examined on 13.5.2008 and was found to have suffered simple injuries on her person. The petitioner No.2 is residing with his father petitioner No.1 at Nangal. The investigation in the case is almost complete and no recovery is to be made. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioners are ready to join the investigation and in the facts and circumstances of the case their custodial interrogation is not required. They are ready to furnish bonds in terms of the directions of this Court. The bail application has been opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General on the ground that petitioners have committed serious offence. 3. I have considered the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties. The complainant was allegedly got medically examined on 13.5.2008 whereas the case was registered on 27.5.2008. The petitioner No.2 and the complainant have matrimonial dispute. It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent that the petitioners have joined the investigation and the investigation in the case is almost complete and no recovery is to be made. In my opinion, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary. Therefore, the petitioners have made out a case for grant of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the petitioners, in the event of arrest, are ordered to be released on bail in F.I.R. No.130 registered on 27.5.2008 at Police Station, Haroli, District Una under Sections 498-A, 506 and 34 I.P.C. on their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting …3… Officer subject to the condition that petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall not hamper the investigation and terrorize prosecution witnesses. 4. The observations made in the order shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Copy dasti, on usual terms. July 24, 2008 ( Kuldip Singh ), J. (soni)