Crl. Misc. No.M-37771 of 2011 1 .. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-37771 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 27th, 2012 Saroj Rani .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present Ms. G.K.Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, DAG, Punjab, for the State, assisted by Mr. B.S.Bhalla, Advocate, for the complainant. VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J. Saroj Rani has sought pre-arrest bail in a case registered by way of FIR No.224 dated 10.11.2011 at Police Station Moga City, District Moga for an offence punishable under sections 406, 498-A read with section 120-B of Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the family of the petitioner used to reside in Canada and Amanpreet Kaur, the complainant married the son of the petitioner only with the hope that she would be taken to Canada. According to her, the petitioner and her family has now returned to India and have settled here and finding no scope of her going to Canada, the complainant started quarreling with Crl. Misc. No.M-37771 of 2011 2 .. the petitioner and her family members. According to her, the status of her family is not such from whom a Skoda car could be demanded. She has further submitted that for this reason, it can be said that the allegations of the complainant are not true. She has further submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and no recovery is left to be effected from her. Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has submitted, on the other hand, that 10 tolas of gold is yet to be recovered from the petitioner. It is a case where some dowry articles have already been recovered. A list of those dowry articles is there as Annexure P1. The husband of the complainant had also applied for anticipatory bail and after some arguments, the said petition has been withdrawn. Nothing is specific in the FIR that 10 tolas of gold, which is sought to be recovered in this case, had been entrusted to the petitioner. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is mother-in-law of the complainant and that she has already joined the investigation, she appears to be entitled to pre-arrest bail. The petition is, consequently allowed and the order dated 14.12.2011 passed by this court, granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made absolute. (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE February 27th, 2012 som