In the Punjab and Haryana High Court, at Chandigarh. CRM-M-4862 of 2011 (O&M) Decided on July 15,2011 Gurbaksh Singh @ Bakshi --Petitioner vs. State of Punjab --Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Arvind Kashyap,Advocate, for the petitioner Mr.A.S.Rai, DAG,Punjab. Rakesh Kumar Jain,J:(Oral) This is an application for regular bail in a case registered vide FIR No.263 dated 13.8.2001 under Sections 494/498-A of the IPC at Police Station Sub Division No.6, Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a dispute between the husband and wife who have five children. The wife is keeping the two sons and is living with her brothers, whereas the husband/petitioner is looking after his three daughters. It is submitted by him that the brothers of the complainant are of shoddy character. There are allegations against the brothers of the complainant and his son of causing murder of the petitioner's mother and one of the brothers of the complainant namely Surinder Singh had even thrown acid on the uncle of the petitioner for which he is undergoing the sentence. It is submitted that the petitioner had been appearing in this case while on bail but as he was thrown out of house by his wife and brothers in the year 2001 and is being haunted by them, therefore, he has been hiding. He further submits that the allegations CRM-M-4862 of 2011 (O&M) -2- contained in the FIR about the commission of offences under Sections 494/498-A of the IPC are totally vague. He further submits that his bail has been declined by the Court below only on the ground that he was declared proclaimed offender but it is submitted that he had never received any summons and has now undertaken before this Court that he will keep on appearing before the trial Court on each and every date. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant. However, learned State Counsel submits that the petitioner has been declined bail by the Court below, therefore, he does not deserve the said concession by this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record from which I have found that the petitioner deserves the concession of bail in this case because all his three daughters are alone whereas the complainant is living with his two sons in the house of the petitioner along-with her brothers. Moreover, it is not a case of a heinous offence. Therefore, without observing anything on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana. July 15,2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge