CRM-M-27595 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M-27595 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:27.09.2011 Hans Raj Godara @ Hans Ram Godara and another . . .Petitioners Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Rajesh Sethi, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Mr.Rajesh Narang, Advocate, for the complainant. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL) It is submitted that the petitioners have joined the investigation as ordered by this Court on 12.9.2011. Learned counsel for the State has conceded this fact but at the same time it is submitted that the petitioners are not disclosing the whereabouts of the husband of the complainant, who is alleged to have been abducted on 23.5.2010. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to Annexure P-7/A wherein the complainant has alleged that “thereafter I kept on talking to my in-laws family and thus we both wife and husband visited Nohar on 25.5.2010. As the house was locked so we kept waiting out side the house. My husband told me that he shall return only after having his share from parents in properties, whereas you should go back to your parental house. So I came back to my parental house.” CRM-M-27595 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that narration of abduction on 23.5.2010 at 5.00 PM is patently false because in the statement of complainant dated 9.7.2010 she herself has alleged that her husband was with her on 25.5.2010. After hearing learned counsel for the parties but without making any observations on the merits, order dated 12.9.2011 is hereby made absolute subject to the conditions already contained therein. Petition is disposed of. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) SEPTEMBER 27, 2011 JUDGE Vivek