Crl. Misc. No. M-30526 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-30526 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: March 26, 2010 Vijay Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. SK Garg Narwana, Advocate with Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Shalini Atri, DAG, Haryana, for respondent No.1. Mr. JS Saneta, Advocate, for respondent No.2. GURDEV SINGH, J. Heard. This petition by the petitioner/accused, Vijay Singh son of Mahinder Singh, under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'), is for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 495 dated 7.10.2008 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal, under Sections 365, 344, 354, 382, 376-G/34, 411 and 120-B IPC. The petitioner is the husband of the prosecutrix-Santosh Yadav, who performed love marriage with him. Similar allegations have been levelled in the FIR and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of the Code against Rattan Singh and Tinku. They were allowed bail by this Court, vide order dated 20.5.2009 passed in Crl. Misc. 11440 of 2009. Crl. Misc. No. M-30526 of 2009 2 When similarly situated accused have been granted the benefit of bail, the same cannot be refused to the present petitioner. The judicial uniformity is to be maintained. Regarding the alleged kidnapping, a controversy was raised before this Court at the instance of the prosecutrix. Thereafter, her sister Neelam Kumari came up with similar plea by way of Crl. Writ Petition No. 661 of 2008, in which the following order was passed on 12.8.2008:- “A similar controversy had earlier been raised before this court at the instance of Santosh Kumari. Now the petitioner claims that the said Santosh Kumari has been illegally detained by her husband Vijay Kumar, respondent No.4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that Santosh Kumari alongwith the petitioner is trying to mislead this court as on 8.5.2007 an FIR was registered indicating that the children of Santosh Kumari had been kidnapped by their father. Now the instant petition has been filed by Neelam Kumari invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court that Santosh Kumari has been taken away by Vijay Kumar and has been illegally detained by him. It appears that both the sisters are trying to abuse the process of the court. Dismissed.” Keeping in view these facts, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of CJM, Karnal, subject to the following conditions:- (i) he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such Crl. Misc. No. M-30526 of 2009 3 facts to the Court or to any police officers; and (ii) he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. March 26, 2010 (GURDEV SINGH ) prem JUDGE