CRM-M 19560 of 2009 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Decided on Oct 08,2009. Reena Rani and another -- Petitioners vs. State of Punjab --Respondent. CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain Present: Mr.Ritesh Pandey,Advocate,for the petitioners Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat,A,A.G.Punjab. Mr.Sandeep Chopra.Advocate,for the complainant Rakesh Kumar Jain, J: The petitioners have applied for anticipatory bail in case registered vide FIR No.201 dated 24.6.2009 under Sections 498,498-A, 406,506,323,120-B IPC, and subsequently added Section 307 IPC at Police Station, Jodhewal, District Ludhiana City. The aforesaid FIR has been registered on the complaint of Sukhwinder Kaur. The present petitioners are jeth and jethani of the complainant, who was married to one Vijay Kumar on 15.2.2006 and have a son, named Jatin. Initially, the petitioners had filed an application for anticipatory bail when the case was registered under Sections 498,498- A,406,506,323,120-B IPC, in which vide order dated 03.7.2009, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, granted interim bail to the petitioners. Later on, applicants/petitioners moved an application for CRM-M 19560 of 2009 2 amendment of the application for inserting Section 307 IPC. The application was allowed and amended petition was taken on record. However, the same was dismissed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, vide his order dated 14.7.2009. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the petitioners have filed the present petition for anticipatory bail in which notice of motion was issued on 22.7.2009 and interim bail was granted to the petitioners. Thereafter, the petitioners have joined the investigation in terms of the aforesaid order. Learned counsel for the petitioners has, inter-alia, argued that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case as the complainant is residing at Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana, whereas the petitioners are residents of village Ladhewali, District Jalandhar. In order to prove this fact, they have placed on record Identity Cards Annexures P-1 and P-2. It is further submitted that while disposing of bail application of co-accused vide order dated 03.7.2009, the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Ludhiana had observed that “the fact of putting kerosene oil upon the complainant also seems to be concocted version since no fire was ever lit on her body”. As against this, learned counsels for the respondents have submitted that there is allegation against the petitioners that they have participated in putting kerosene oil on the complainant, but who, as good luck would have it, escaped un-hurt. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, especially the fact that the petitioners are residing separately and have already joined the investigation, order dated 22.7.2009 is hereby made absolute. CRM-M 19560 of 2009 3 It is, however, clarified that nothing observed herein shall be taken to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The petition stands disposed of. Oct 08 ,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge