Crl.M.No.M-33899 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. 1. Crl.M.No.M-33899 of 2010 (O&M) Santosh Sharma .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent 2. Crl.M.No.M-33900 of 2010 (O&M) Vinodh Kumar .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent Date of Decision: November 18, 2010 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Rahul Dev Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) This order will dispose of both the aforementioned petitions bearing Crl.M.Nos.33899 and 33900 of 2010, filed by petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to them in case FIR No.226, dated 4.10.2010, under Section 306 IPC, registered at Police Station City Rajpura. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the orders passed by learned Sessions Judge, Patiala, vide which applications filed on behalf of the present petitioners for anticipatory bail were dismissed. Brief allegations are that deceased Pinki was previously married to Jugal Kishore and after taking divorce from him, she contracted marriage with Manu Sharma, i.e., son of present petitioners and after the marriage deceased alongwith her daughter Simran started living with her husband in the house in which petitioners also used to reside. There are Crl.M.No.M-33899 of 2010 (O&M) -2- allegations that her husband and the present petitioners started beating her and started harassing her and they used to raise threats to throw her out of the house due to which she used to remain disturbed. The present complaint was lodged by the sister of the deceased. There are specific allegations that on 3.10.2010, the petitioners-accused and their son had fought with the deceased and they again threatened to throw her out of the house on account of which she committed suicide by taking poison, The incident was allegedly narrated by the deceased to the complainant. The incident of 3.10.2010 was also witnessed by daughter of the deceased. The case is at initial stage of investigation and hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners-accused. In view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petitions filed by petitioners-Santosh Sharma and Vinodh Kumar for grant of anticipatory bail are, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit. 18.11.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge