Crl.M.No.27059-M of 2010 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No.27059-M of 2010 Date of Order: 3.12.2010 Lachhman Singh .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Prayer on behalf of petitioner-husband under Section 438 Cr.P.C is for grant of anticipatory/pre arrest bail in case FIR No.87 dated 9.8.2010 under Sections 406/498-A IPC, P.S Gharinda, District Amritsar lodged by the complainant-wife Amarjit Kaur. As per allegations in the FIR lodged by the complainant- Amarjit Kaur, she was maltreated and mentally tortured soon after her marriage on 1.6.2009 by her husband-Lachhman Singh (petitioner), father in law Baldev Singh, mother in law-Paramjit Kaur and sisters in law Roni and Gurpinder Kaur for bringing insufficient dowry. There was persistent demand of a big car in dowry by the named accused. It is further alleged that during her pregnancy because of non-fulfilment of the demand for car, she was turned out of her matrimonial home. However, due to the intervention of the respectables, she returned back to her matrimonial home. It is further alleged that at the time of birth of the son of the petitioner on Crl.M.No.27059-M of 2010 #2# 10.4.2010, family of in-laws were given gold ornaments and other articles by her parents but the named accused stuck to their demand of car. It is alleged that the complainant was given beatings and finally turned her out of the house while retaining her entire istridhan. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prima facie no case is made out against the petitioner and that the present FIR is counter blast to the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the petitioner. Learned state counsel, on instructions from ASI Karamjit Singh, states that gold ornaments are yet to be recovered from the petitioner. Without commenting upon merit of the case and taking into account the gravity of the offence, I do not deem it appropriate to grant the concession of pre arrest bail to the petitioner as his custodial interrogation is necessary for effective investigation. Dismissed. December 03, 2010 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE