Crl.M.No. M-23343/2010(O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl.M.No. M-23343/2010(O&M) Date of decision: 17.12.2010. Sanjay Sarin ....................Petitioner. v. Union Territory,Chandigarh and others .....................Respondents. Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh. Present:- MrRaman Mahajan,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Rajiv Sharma,Addl.PP for UT Chandigarh-respondent 1. Mr.PS Ahluwali,Advocate for complainant-respondent no.2 Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral). Petitioner/husband Sanjay Sarin has filed the instant petition under Section 438 Cr.PC seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.13 dated 22.6.2010, under Sections 406,498-A,506,120-B IPC, registered at PS Sector 3,Chandigarh. As per allegations in the aforesaid FIR the marriage between petitioner and complainant- Mrs.Payal Sarin was solemnised in February 2001 and out of this wedlock two kids namely Shivam and Shivya were born. It is alleged that petitioner used to beat the complainant frequently and was dubbed by her in laws as characterless. It is further alleged that the complainant was consistently tortured and harassed in front of everyone including servants and children by the petitioner and his family members and was taunted for bringing less Crl.M.No. M-23343/2010(O&M) 2 dowry. It is also the allegation of the complainant that petitioner used to beat her mercilessly over trivial issues. The petitioner-husband alongwith his family members i.e. Father, mother, brother and sister-in-law (bhabi) had applied for anticipatory bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge. All the applicants except the petitioner husband were granted anticipatory bail. Hence the present petition. During the course of hearing of the present bail application on November 10,2010, at the joint request made by the learned counsel, the matter was also referred to the High Court Mediation and Conciliation Center. However, as per report dated 8.12.2010 submitted by the Mediator, the mediation proceedings have failed. At the time of hearing today, learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the allegations levelled are false, baseless, vague and general in nature and as such the petitioner husband deserves the concession of anticipatory bail. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant wife has stated that all the istri dhan, including valuable jewellery articles given at the time of marriage has not been returned. Pointed reference has been made to observations made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh in his order dated 5.8.2010, whereby it is specifically mentioned that the petitioner himself admitted in the cross examination that they did not return all the istri dhan. It is further submitted that Crl.M.No. M-23343/2010(O&M) 3 petitioner, who was granted interim bail during the pendency of the present petition, has failed to cooperate with the investigation in getting the remaining istri dhan articles recovered. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of allegations, in my opinion, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for effective investigations. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. Crl.M.No.65993/2010 seeking to place on documents (Annexures P-9 to P-16) also stands dismissed. 17.12.2010 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge