Crl.M.No.M-18973 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-18973 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 7, 2010 Kartaro Devi .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.K.S.Cheema, Advocate for the petitioner. ...... 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 case FIR No.88, dated 22.6.2010, under Section 498-A IPC, registered at Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully. The marriage between complainant and son of the petitioner was performed on 2.10.2008. However, no child was born out of the wedlock. The dowry given by the parents of the complainant did not satisfy the husband of the complainant, i.e., son of the petitioner and other family members and hence they started harassing her. There was a demand of Rs.1 lac. Allegations are also of beatings. Rs.50,000/- were given by parents of the complainant to her husband and the present petitioner. Panchayat was convened. Threat was given to set the complainant on fire. Threat was also given by the petitioner that she would re-marry her son. Threat was also given even by the husband of the complainant that he would kill her and throw her dead-body in the canal. Ultimately, she was turned out of the house in three clothes by saying that she should come back with car and ornaments etc., failing which she would be killed. Crl.M.No.M-18973 of 2010 (O&M) -2- Even the husband of the complainant, i.e., son of present petitioner has not been arrested. FIR has been lodged after thorough enquiry conducted by the DSP. Application was moved by the complainant on 13.5.2010 and after enquiry the present FIR was lodged on 22.6.2010. Dowry articles are yet to be recovered. Hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner- Kartaro Devi, for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit. 7.7.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge