IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M 18409 of 2008 ( O & M) Date of decision: 20.03.2009 Rishi Kamboj ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present: Ms.Gargi Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.T.S.Salana, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab *** Harbans Lal, J.( Oral) This petition has been moved by Rishi Kamboj under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case F.I.R.No.112 registered under Section 304-B of I.P.C. on 15.05.2007 at Police Station City Rajpura, District Patiala. The facts of the case in brief are: Harbhajan Singh made a statement before the police that he has three children. Eldest of them Sukhwinder Kaur @ Shanu, aged about 21 years, was married on 04.04.2004 with Rishi (referring to the petitioner). At the time of marriage, he had given sufficient dowry as per his capacity, but after one year of the marriage her husband- Rishi, Shalini-sister-in-law, Sarla-mother-in-law and father Madan Lal started harassing her. Some days ago, his daughter, Sukhwinder Kaur called him up on 14.05.2007 at about 10 'o' clock in the morning (10.00 AM) from her father-in-law's mobile phone and said that she was perfectly alright. But on the same day at about 10 'o' clock in the night ( 10.00 PM) he received a telephone call from the CRM No. M 18409 of 2008 -2- mobile phone of the neighbour of her in-laws and it was informed that his daughter had been taken to GMC Hospital, Sector 32,Chandigarh. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the other co- accused, who were similarly situated to the petitioner have been admitted to regular bail by this Court and by applying the Rule of Parity the petitioner may also be released on regular bail. Mr.T.S.Salana, DAG, Punjab countered these arguments with full force that the petitioner being the husband, the concession of bail should not be bestowed upon him. Concededly, the petitioner is in custody since 15.06.2007. The conclusion of trial is likely to take a considerable time. In view of the fact that the co-accused who were similarly situated to the petitioner have been released on bail by this Court, the concession of bail cannot be withheld from the petitioner. Bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala. March 20, 2009 ( Harbans Lal ) amrit Judge