CRM No. M-23112 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-23112 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.08.2009 Manoj Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Vipin Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajan Gupta, J. This is a petition for anticipatory bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections 406, 498-A, 506, 323 IPC at Police Station Sadar, Bhiwani, vide FIR No.268 dated 19th July, 2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that a compromise was earlier arrived at between the parties on 4th October, 2008. In view of the same, the petitioner deserves the concession of anticipatory bail. Moreover, no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Thus, his custodial interrogation is not required. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It appears that earlier application for anticipatory bail i.e. Crl. Misc. No.31710-M of 2008 was preferred before this court by the petitioner alongwith other co-accused. Learned counsel had withdrawn the prayer in respect of the petitioner and pressed the same for others. CRM No. M-23112 of 2009 2 The other accused were granted the pre-arrest bail. Thus, there is no ground to entertain another petition on behalf of the petitioner praying for the same relief. In any case, a perusal of the FIR shows that there are clear cut allegations against the petitioner of cruelty and harassment to the complainant apart from demand of dowry. It has also been alleged that dowry articles, which were entrusted to the petitioner, were never returned. The compromise, on which reliance has been placed by learned counsel, is dated 4th October, 2008. However, the anticipatory bail application was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani on 18th November, 2008. It shows that compromise, if any, was never adhered to by the parties. Under the circumstances, I do not find it a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on bail. The petition is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE August 26, 2009 'rajpal'