IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc M- 16801 of 2010 Date of decision: 22.2.2011 Surinder Chhabra and anr …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab …Respondent Present: Mrs BK Mann, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr VPS Sidhu, AAG Punjab, Mr Puneet Bali, Advocate for the complainant. S.S.SARON, J. Talks for compromise, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, were going on with the complainant – Sakshi. On the last date of hearing, the petitioners had brought a demand draft of Rs 15,00,000/- payable to the complainant. However, the complainant was not present and an adjournment slip had been filed. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the amount is too inadequate and the complainant should be paid at least Rs 50,00,000/- for settlement of the entire matter. It may be noticed that for the present a settlement cannot be reached at. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the gold articles have been submitted in the Police Station. According to the learned counsel for the State, out of the 15 items submitted, 7 items have been identified by the complainant and it is accepted that they belong to her. The rest, however, it was submitted that the same did not belong to her. Cr Misc M- 16801 of 2010 2 Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners have been ready and willing to settle the entire matter; however, the complainant was not coming forward. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the dispute in the present case is a matrimonial one. Some recovery has been effected from the petitioners and the petitioners are ready and willing to even otherwise settle the matter amicably. However, the complainant, it appears, at present is not ready for a settlement. The petitioners were granted interim bail by this Court on 9.6.2010 and in consequence thereof they have joined the investigations and some recoveries even have been effected. According to the prosecution, some recoveries are still to be effected. It may, however, be noticed that the petitioners did submit 15 items of jewellery but the complainant accepted 7 items to be belonging to her. The rest do not belong to her. The question as regards the items given at the time of marriage is to be determined and investigated by the Police. The same is to be ascertained also on the basis of documents and photographs. The petitioners have joined the investigations and are ready to join in future as well. In the circumstances, the petitioners, in the event of their arrest, shall be admitted to bail on their furnishing personal bond and surety each to the satisfaction of the arresting/IO. They shall, however, join investigation as and when called and shall abide by the conditions provided under Section 438(2) CrPC. This petition stands disposed of. 22.2.2011 ( S.S.SARON ) ASR Judge