In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision: 25.3. 2009 CRM-M No. 31137 of 2008 Rakesh Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent CRM-M No. 5971 of 2009 Sunita Rani ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mrs.Baljit Mann, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Sidharth Sarup, AAG, Haryana. Mr.H.S.Sullar, Advocate for the complainant. **** SABINA, J. This order shall dispose of CRM-M No.31137 of 2008 and CRM-M No. 5971 of 2009. These petitions have been filed by Rakesh Kumar and Sunita Rani under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('CR.P.C.' for short) for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 323 dated 11.10.2007 under Sections 304-B/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station City, Ambala City. CRM-M No. 31137 of 2008 -2- As per the allegations in the FIR, deceased Gagandeep Kaur was married to Sahil, son of the petitioners, on 23.4.2007. It has been further alleged that on many occasions cash was given by the complainant to his son-in-law Sahil. The in-laws of the deceased used to harass her to bring more dowry. The deceased died on 11.10.2007 due to hanging/strangulation. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the relations between the petitioners and their son were not cordial. A news item was got published in 'Punjab Kesri' newspaper by petitioner Rakesh Kumar that his son was not under his control and he had alienated him from his movable and immovable property. The said news item was published much before the marriage of the deceased with Sahil on 19.12.2005 (Annexure P-3). Proceedings under Sections 107/151 Cr.P.C. were also initiated against Sahil at the instance of petitioner Rakesh Kumar (Annexure P-4). The petitioners are in custody since 12.10.2007. Learned State counsel, who is assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, has opposed these petitions. A perusal of the FIR reveals that the allegations of payment of cash amount have been made by the complainant against Sahil, husband of the deceased. From Annexure P-3 and Annexure P-4, it appears that the relations between Sahil and his parents (petitioners) were not cordial. The news item was published on 19.12.2005 and proceedings under Sections 107/151 Cr.P.C. were initiated in June, 2006, whereas, the marriage of the deceased was performed with Sahil on 23.4.2007. The fact that whether the CRM-M No. 31137 of 2008 -3- petitioners are also responsible for causing death of deceased Gagandeep Kaur would more appropriately be gone into and considered during trial Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, these petitions are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be admitted to bail subject to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala. (SABINA) JUDGE March 25, 2009 anita