IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-5051 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 10, 2011 Juby Bose. …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. S.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) This is a petition seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (father- in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant) by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali vide order dated 30.07.2010. Record reveals that Investigating Officer has moved an application for cancellation of bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali, vide order dated 25.10.2010 has directed the father-in-law and mother-in- law accused – respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to join the Crl. Misc. No.M-5051 of 2011 investigation. Thereafter, Investigating Officer has made statement before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali, on 20.12.2010 that father-in-law and mother-in-law – respondent Nos. 2 and 3 respectively have joined the investigation. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the cancellation of bail application vide order dated 20.12.2010 having observed that allegations regarding entrustment of dowry articles to the respondents are vague and dowry articles are not expected to be in their possession. Mr. S.S. Sidhu, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner-complainant, has fairly admitted that husband was arrested, however, he was enlarged on regular bail by the Competent Court on 22.02.2011. Mr. Sidhu has further fairly stated that husband Ani Laxmanan had filed suit for dissolution of marriage before the Family Court, Thane, Maharashtra. Learned counsel has further stated that Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 06.01.2011 on the transfer application moved by the complainant (wife) has stayed the further proceedings of the divorce petition pending before the Family Court, Thane, Maharashtra. Mr. Sidhu has fairly stated that as per the Investigating Officer, police has searched the house of the husband in Maharahstra and has found no dowry article therein. 2 Crl. Misc. No.M-5051 of 2011 In the opinion of this Court, since husband has already been enlarged on regular bail and no dowry article was found available in the house of the husband; divorce petition is pending, therefore, question what were the items given at the time of marriage can be adjudicated upon by the Competent Court hearing the divorce petition and an appropriate order regarding the return of the articles given at the time of marriage can be passed under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Since matter can be adjudicated by the Competent Court under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (father-in-law and mother- in-law) have joined the investigation; have not misused the bail as yet, therefore, I am not inclined to cancel the bail. Dismissed. March 10, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 3