IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P.(M) No.185 of 2008 Decided on: March 25, 2008. Pradeep Kumar. …Petitioner. VERSUS State of Himachal Pradesh ….Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner: Mr G.D.Verma, Sr.Advocate with Mr B.C.Verma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr A.K.Bansal, Addl.A.G. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral) This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in F.I.R. No.30/08 dated 1.3.2008 registered at Police Station, Shimla (East) under Sections 498-A, 34 I.P.C. 2. Heard and perused the record. The respondent has filed the status report which is placed on the file of Cr.P.M.(M) No.184 of 2008. Chetna Verma wife of petitioner submitted an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ghumarwin on 22.8.2007 directed S.H.O. Police Station, Bharari, District Bilaspur to investigate the matter and accordingly F.I.R. No.98/2007 was registered under Section 498-A IPC at Police Station Bharari, District Bilaspur. Later on, the case was transferred Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes …2… to Police Station, Shimla (East) and F.I.R. No.30/08 dated 1.3.2008 came to be registered at Police Station, Shimla (East). 3. The petitioner has alleged that marriage between the petitioner and Chetna Verma (complainant) was solemnized on 19.7.2003 and they have one son from the wedlock born on 30.11.2004. The complainant stayed with the petitioner till 19.4.2004 and after 20.4.2004 the complainant started living with her mother in House No.59, Cinema Colony, Main Market, Bilaspur. The complainant earlier filed petition for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the Court at Bilaspur which was withdrawn on 22.5.2006. On 31.5.2006, the complainant was brought back by the petitioner and the complainant stayed with him till third week of October 2006. The complainant suffers from some mental disorder. The petitioner arranged her medical treatment at P.G.I. Chandigarh but the complainant did not co-operate in treatment. The complainant left for Bilaspur on or about 22.10.2006. The complainant again filed petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance on 1.1.2007 at Ghumarwin. In order to avoid any dispute, the matter was settled on 7.6.2007 and petitioner agreed to pay monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.2400 to complainant and the minor son. This amount is being paid regularly to the complainant. The complainant has levelled false allegations against the petitioner and on that basis F.I.R. No.98/2007 was registered at Police Station, Bharari, District Bilaspur, which has been transferred to Police Station, Shimla (East) by way of F.I.R. No.30/08 dated 1.3.2008. The petitioner has …3… committed no offence. The petitioner is ready to join investigation and no recovery is to be made from him. 4. The bail application has been opposed by learned Additional Advocate General. In the status report, there is no allegation that petitioner has not joined the investigation nor it has been stated that any recovery is to be made from the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and the petitioner, in the event of arrest, is ordered to be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 30/08 dated 1.3.2008 registered at Police Station, Shimla (East) under Sections 498-A, 34 I.P.C., on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer subject to the condition that petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called and shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. 5. The observations made in the order shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Copy dasti, on usual terms. March 25, 2008 ( Kuldip Singh ), J. (soni)