Crl.M.No. M-21671/2010(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No. M-21671/2010(O&M) Date of decision: 29.7.2010. Ashok Asthana ....................Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Vishal Garg,Advocate for the petitioner. Jaswant Singh.J. Crl.M.No.38440/2010 seeking exemption to file certified copies of Annexures is allowed. Crl.M.No.21671 of 2010 Present petition under Section 482 Cr.PC has been filed for setting aside the portion of order dated 21.5.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby the petitioner has been directed to furnish local sureties while being granted anticipatory bail by Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer in FIR No. 93 dated 20.4.2010 under Sections 498-A/406 IPC, registered at PS NIT Faridabad. The son of petitioner, a resident of Delhi, got married to Anamika, a resident of Faridabad on 15.7.2005. Due to marital discord between the two, the aforementioned FIR was lodged by complainant wife against the family members of the husband including the petitioner, who is father in law of the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge while granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner has been very harsh in insisting that the bail bonds required to be furnished in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two local sureties each in the like amount. It is submitted that the petitioner despite his best Crl.M.No. M-21671/2010(O&M) 2 efforts has not been able to secure two local sureties from Faridabad whereas he is ready to furnish sureties, who are not local, to the entire satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. Notice of motion. Mr.M.S.Sindhu, Additional Advocate General,Haryana, who is present in Court accepts notice. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the nature of the offences and facts of this case, this petition is disposed of with a direction that the order dated 21.5.2010 is modified to the extent that the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer shall not insist on two local sureties, if otherwise found reliable/sufficient. In other words, the sureties shall not be rejected on the ground that they are not residents of Faridabad. 29.7.2010 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge