In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No.M-34300 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.3.2010 Subash Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Ritesh Pandey, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. **** SABINA, J. This petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 34 dated 5.6.2009, under Sections 498-A, 406 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Narot Jaimal Singh District Gurdaspur. While issuing notice of motion, the following order was passed by this Court on 4.12.2009:- “ Counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR has been lodged five years after the marriae and even otherwise the allegations are highly exaggerated, taking into consideration the status of the parties. It is further Criminal Misc. No.M-34300 of 2009 (O&M) -2- submitted that there is no medical report to fortify the allegations that the complainant was set on fire by the petitioner. Notice of motion for 9.2.2010. In the meanwhile, it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. Parties are directed to be present in person on the next date of hearing. In order to secure the presence of the complainant, the petitoner would be required to deposita sum of Rs.5,000/- as expenses Criminal Misc. No.M-34300 of 2009 (O&M) -3- before the Registry within a fortnight.” Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Kewal Krishan, has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation in terms of the order reproduced above. The petitioner and the complainant are present in the Court in person. The petitioner has submitted that he is ready to take respondent No.2 to the matrimonial home. Petitioner and respondent No.2 have levelled allegations against each other qua performance of second marriage. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be just and expedient to confirm the interim bail granted by this Court. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed and the order granting interim bail dated 4.12.2009 is made absolute. (SABINA) JUDGE March 17, 2010 anita