Crl.Misc No M- 7078 of 2010 Balwinder Kaur Vs. State of Punjab PRESENT: Mr.B.S.Walia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Vishal Munjal, Addl.A.G.Punjab Mr.Bhanu Pratap Advocate with Mr.Vivek K.Thakur, Advocate for complainant. *** Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and no recovery is to be effected from her as nothing was given at the time of marriage. Learned counsel further submits that co-accused Jasjit Singh has been granted regular bail by the trial Court and no request for recovery of dowry articles was there. Moreover, immediately after the marriage, the complainant went to abroad along with her husband and nothing was given to the present petitioner and the question of misappropriation does not arise. Learned counsel for the State submits that although the petitioner has joined the investigation but she has not returned the dowry articles including gold and cash. Since recovery has not been effected from the petitioner, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the complainant also opposes the bail on the ground that the petitioner got the relief of interim bail by making false statement. It was mentioned in the order dated 19.4.2010 that “the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and is also ready to hand over the dowry articles including gold and cash given at the time of marriage” but nothing Crl.Misc No M- 7078 of 2010 [2] has been returned by the petitioner. The husband is in abroad and the dowry articles are with the present petitioner. Since the petitioner has not co-operated with the investigation and no dowry articles have been returned, the concession of anticipatory bail cannot be granted to the petitioner. The petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) June 30, 2010 JUDGE raghav