IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M-16931 of 2009 Date of Decision:25.1.2010 Rashid Rasheed .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. G.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab. Ms. Harleen Kaur, Advocate for the complainant. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. Learned State counsel on instructions from Head Constable Gurbachan Singh, states that the petitioner has since joined the investigation and the dowry articles have been recovered except 250 grams of gold and a cash of Rs.1,61,000/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, states that there was no dowry because the parties are “Muslims” and in fact the petitioner is liable to pay “Mehar” to the girl at the time of divorce. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, order dated 25.6.2009 is made absolute subject to deposit of Rs.1,50,000/- by the petitioner before the trial court which shall be kept in the shape of FDR and subsequently released to the party, who finally succeeds. 25.1.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE