Cr.Misc. M 19774 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 19774 of 2010 Date of decision:5.10.2010 Sandeep Kumar Anand Petitioner vs. State of Punjab Respondent Present: Mr. Puneet Bali, Advocate. Mr. Abhishek Chautala, AAG, Pb Mr. KS Dadwal, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioner seeks the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case, registered at the instance of his wife Monika alleging that the petitioner is responsible for maltreating her on account of demand of swift car having not been met. The dowry articles have been misappropriated by the petitioner and his family members. An attempt was made to get the matter amicably settled by referring the same to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. Prima facie it is a case of broken marriage and feasibility of parties resuming cohabitation are remote. Learned State counsel has opposed the pre-arrest bail contending that the recoveries are yet to be effected and that chances of tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out. After taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that the liberty of the petitioner cannot be curtailed in the present circumstances solely for the reason that certain recoveries are yet to made, especially when the petitioner has offered to hand over all the dowry articles, available with him, Cr.Misc. M 19774 of 2010 2 to the complainant. The proceedings of mediation and Conciliation Centre have been taken into consideration. The parties having not been able to work out the modalities and quantification of the amount, which is to be paid by the petitioner to complainant- wife for parting company, in the interest of justice, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioner, he will be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the condition that the petitioner will join the investigation as and when required by the police and will not tamper with evidence or hamper the investigation. The petitioner will pay a bank draft of ` 5 lacs in the name of Monica by 30.10.2010. It will be open to the investigating officer to hand over the said bank draft to the complainant without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to adjust this amount against the cost of the dowry article, yet to be recovered. Right of complainant for lump sum maintenance to be paid to the complainant-wife or any other amount, at the time of settlement of matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the complainant will also not be prejudiced. The civil rights of the complainant will also not be prejudiced in any manner on receipt of ` 5 lacs. This order will not prejudice the mediation proceedings, if any, pending between the parties. October 5 ,2010 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE