IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 10010 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: May 12, 2010. Nanki and others. ...... PETITIONERS Versus State of Haryana ...... RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. Gurinder Pal Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.M.Anand, Addl..A.G., Haryana. Mr. Rahul Deswal, Advocate for the complainant. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.121, dated 09.12.2009, under Sections 323/498-A/406/506 IPC, registered at Police Station Rajendra Park, Gurgaon. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. CRM No.M-10010 of 2010 This Court while issuing notice of motion on 05.04.2010 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.17992 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-10010 of 2010 Argues that husband of complainant has already been arrested in this case and all the dowry articles have been recovered from him and he is on regular bail. Notice of motion for 12.5.2010. However, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 05.04.2010. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State that though petitioners have joined the investigation however, some recovery of dowry articles is yet to be effected. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that there is only vague allegation regarding dowry against the present petitioners and that husband of the complainant used to live separately from the petitioners and that they are having no concern with family life of the complainant and her husband. In this case, petitioner No.1 is old mother-in-law and petitioner No.4 is old father-in-law of complainant. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are 2 CRM No.M-10010 of 2010 brothers-in-law of complainant. Husband of complainant has already been arrested in this case and he has been granted regular bail. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Nanki, Sachin, Darshan Lal and Mohan Lal is accepted and order dated 05.04.2010 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) May 12, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3