Crl.M.No.M-24694 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-24694 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:September 16, 2010 Bimla .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Manohar Lal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Kshitij Sharma, AAG, Haryana. ...... 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 FIR No.139, dated 30.6.2010, registered under Sections 498-A, 307, 34 IPC, at Police Station Kanina. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 25.8.2010, passed the following order: “Crl.M.No.43985 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-24694 of 2010 Argues that though petitioner is mother-in-law of the complainant, however, from the contents of FIR no role has been attributed to the petitioner except one stray sentence that she also used to beat and harass the complainant. The allegations are against co-accused, i.e., husband of the complainant. Even she was not present at the time of the occurrence. She used to live separate from the complainant and her husband. It is further contended that it has been Crl.M.No.M-24694 of 2010 (O&M) -2- specifically averred in the FIR that only husband lifted the burning kerosene lamp and threw on the complainant. Notice of motion for 16.9.2010. However, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case she is arrested, she shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. ” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has already joined the investigation. It has been stated by learned State counsel as well that the petitioner has joined the investigation and that she is no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that she is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 25.8.2010, granting interim bail to petitioner-Bimla, is, hereby made absolute subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. 16.9.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge