Crl.M.No.M-21387 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. 1. Crl.M.No.M-21387 of 2010 (O&M) Harbhajan Kaur and others .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab .....Respondent 2. Crl.M.No.M-22078 of 2010 (O&M) Harpreet Kaur and others .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab .....Respondent Date of Decision: August 20, 2010 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.B.S.Bajwa, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, Addl.A.G., Punjab. Mr.R.S.Bajaj, Advocate for the complainant. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) This order will dispose of both the aforementioned petitions bearing Crl.M.Nos.21387 and 22078 of 2010, filed by petitioners, namely, Harbhajan Kaur, Harjit Singh, Amandeep Kaur and Harpreet Kaur, Gurprit Singh and Vikramjit Singh @ Vicky, respectively, under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to them in case FIR No.97, dated 23.5.2010, under Sections 380, 448, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Beas, District Amritsar Rural. Crl.M.No.M-21387 of 2010 (O&M) -2- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. This Court while issuing notice of motion in Crl.M.No.M- 21387 of 2010, passed the following order on 28.7.2010: “Crl.M.No.37891 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-21387 of 2010 Argues that petitioner no.1 is widow and the complainant is her Jeth (elder brother of husband). Further argues that petitioner No.1 alongwith her children has been residing in the house in dispute for the last 40-50 years and the said house has been given to petitioner No.1 in family settlement. Further argues that complainant wants to take forcible possession of the house from petitioner No.1. The present FIR has been registered against the petitioners by Jeth of petitioner No.1. Further argues that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are son and daughter-in-law of petitioner no.1. Notice of motion for 20.8.2010. However, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they 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.” This Court while issuing notice of motion in Crl.M.No.M- 22078 of 2010, passed the following order on 4.8.2010: “ Crl.M.No.39190 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-22078 of 2010 Argues that petitioner nos.1 and 2 are grand children and petitioner no.3 is son of Harbhajan Kaur, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.M.No.M- 21387 of 2010, Annexure P8. Further argues that case of present petitioners is also on similar footings. It is contended that dispute is between Harbhajan Kaur, grand mother of petitioner nos.1 and 2 and mother of petitioner no.3 and the Crl.M.No.M-21387 of 2010 (O&M) -3- complainant, who is her Jeth, i.e., elder brother of husband, and that complainant wants to take forcible possession of the house from her in which she alongwith other family members are residing for the last about 40-50 years. Notice of motion for 20.8.2010. However, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they 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. To be heard alongwith Crl.M.No.M-21387 of 2010.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that pursuant to the said orders, the petitioners have already joined the investigation. It is further contended that petitioner-Harbhajan Kaur, is widow and the other petitioners are her children and grand children. Further contends that complainant is her Jeth, i.e., elder brother of the husband and in fact, petitioner-Harbhajan Kaur alongwith other family members are residing in the house in dispute for the last about 40-50 years and that complainant intends to evict them from the house forcibly in the garb of this FIR, as he resides abroad. It has been stated by learned State counsel as well that though the petitioners have joined the investigation, however, recovery of alleged stolen articles is yet to be effected. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Dispute between the parties is a family dispute. Civil suit is also pending. Petitioner-Harbhajan Kaur is widow and the other petitioners are her children and grand children. Complainant is residing abroad. They have already joined the investigation. In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, orders dated 28.7.2010 and 4.8.2010, granting interim bail to petitioners-Harbhajan Kaur, Harjit Singh, Amandeep Kaur and Harpreet Kaur, Gurprit Singh and Vikramjit Singh @ Vicky, are, hereby made absolute subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section Crl.M.No.M-21387 of 2010 (O&M) -4- 438(2) Cr.P.C. Both the present petitions stand disposed of accordingly. 20.8.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge