Crl.M.No.25591-M of 2010 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No.25591-M of 2010 Date of Order: 29.11.2010 Krishan Lal and another .....Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Advocate for the complainant. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Prayer under Section 438 Cr.P.C on behalf of petitioners, who are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant Sonu Gupta, is for grant of anticipatory/pre arrest bail in case FIR No.158 dated 28.4.2010 under Sections 406/498-A IPC, P.S Kotwali, Patiala. It is submitted that marriage of Sandeep Gupta-son of the petitioners and the complainant Sonu Gupta, who both were divorcees, was solemnized on 17.6.2009. As per the allegations in the FIR, a sum of Rs.8 lacs was paid in cash to Sandeep Gupta and Krishan Lal-petitioner No.1 besides gold ornament and articles. It is further alleged that there was a fresh demand of Rs.20 lacs and on account of non-fulfilment of the same, she was turned out of the house. During the proceedings before this Court, a sum of Rs.5 lacs has already been paid to the complainant-wife through her brother-Keshav, Crl.M.No.25591-M of 2010 #2# who has been present in court. Today, at the time of hearing, another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- by way of bank draft No.874132 dated 23.11.2010 payable to the complainant-wife has been handed over to Keshav-brother of the complainant, photo copy of which has been retained on file. Learned state counsel, on instructions from ASI Sukhwinder Singh, states that the petitioners have joined investigation and their custodial interrogation is no longer required. It is stated that 15 tollas of gold was yet to be recovered. He and counsel for the complainant,however, concede that a sum of Rs.6 lacs has been received by the complainant side without any protest before this Court. Without commenting upon merit of the case and keeping in view the fact that recovery of the remaining articles can be effected from the husband, I deem it appropriate to accept the prayer of the petitioners for grant of pre-arrest bail. In view of the above, interim protection/ pre arrest bail granted vide order dated 23.9.2010 is made absolute. Petition stands disposed of. November 29, 2010 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE