Crl. Misc. No. M-17667 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-17667 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: July 23, 2010 Balwinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. TS Khera, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. AS Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab. GURDEV SINGH, J. Heard. This petition under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been filed by Balwinder Singh-petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 64 dated 6.4.2010 registered at Police Station Beas, District Amritsar, under Sections 498-A, 506, 376, 511 and 323/34 IPC. This FIR was got registered by Sukhjinder Kaur-complainant, who was married to Shamsher Singh, son of the present petitioner, on 1.10.2006. She narrated therein that after ¾ months of her marriage the present petitioner and his wife started harassing her and her husband joined his parents and all of them started demanding dowry. In the year 2008 Rs. 1 lakh were given by his father to her in-laws and still they continued to harass her and she was not allowed to use articles and things, such as television, fridge etc., which were given by her parents. On 5.4.2010 at 7/7.30 p.m. the petitioner, his wife Rajwinder Kaur and her husband Shamsher Singh jointly gave beatings to Crl. Misc. No. M-17667 of 2010 2 her. Her father-in-law, the present petitioner, also tried to molest her during those beatings and took her ornaments consisting of one gold chain, gold ear rings, two bangles and two rings. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had disinherited his son and daughter-in-law, by giving a public notice in the newspaper on 4.4.2010 and on the very next day, the story, which has been given in the FIR, was fabricated in order to falsely involve the petitioner. He also contended that an inquiry was conducted by SP (D), Batala, who found that no such occurrence had taken place in the manner alleged by the complainant. On the other hand, learned State counsel has tried to contest this petition on the ground that immediately after the occurrence, the petitioner was medically examined and seven injuries were found her person, which corroborate her version as given in the FIR. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required as the stolen articles are yet to be recovered from him and serious allegations have been levelled against him in the FIR. Giving of a public notice one day before the alleged occurrence, is a strong circumstance in favour of the petitioner. The SP (D) Batala, conducted the inquiry into the facts mentioned in the FIR and copy of that inquiry report has been placed on the record. After the inquiry, he came to the conclusion that the petitioner had enmity with Rajinder Singh and on 5.4.2010 when the complainant went to the house of said Rajinder Singh, Amrik Singh came there and they conspired and obtained false medical report and got the FIR registered under Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC. When such a finding has been recorded by this SP (D), I Crl. Misc. No. M-17667 of 2010 3 am of the considered opinion that it a case where the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. In case of arrest of the petitioner in the FIR mentioned in the petition, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, subject to the following conditions:- (i) He shall join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer; (ii) he shall not offer any any threat, promise, or inducement to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the same to the Investigating Officer/Court; and (iii) he shall not leave the limits of this country without prior permission of the Court. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. July 23, 2010 (GURDEV SINGH ) prem JUDGE