CRM-M No. 9996 of 2011 **** Jaspal Kaur vs. State of Punjab Present: Mr. R.S. Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Surinder S. Dhaliwal, Addl.AG, Punjab. **** This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No. 50 dated 8.3.2011, under Section 304-B IPC registered at Police Station Sahnewal. On 4.4.2011 the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that Balwinder Kaur deceased got married with Harbans Singh, elder son of the applicant, 12 years back; Harbans Singh, the elder son of the applicant, has expired about four years back, therefore, as per the custom prevailing in the community Balwinder Kaur was married to the younger son,namely, Arvinder Singh of the petitioner with the consent of the petitioner and the family members of Balwinder Kaur deceased. He has further argued that Balwinder Kaur has committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance because she was under depression because of the death of her first husband. Learned counsel states that kareva marriage with the younger brother of the deceased husband itself shows that there was no dowry demand. Notice of motion for 4.5.2011. Meanwhile, it is directed that in the event of arrest,petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing of personal bond and one surety to the satisfaction of the Investigating officer subject to the conditions mentioned under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. However, it is clarified that petitioner CRM-M No. 9996 of 2011 -2- shall participate in the investigation as and when he is required by the Investigating Officer to do so.” Learned Addl.AG, on instructions from ASI Narinder Kumar, has stated that though the petitioner has joined the investigation, yet the allegations against her are serious. He, however, has also stated that the son of the petitioner is in custody. In my opinion even though the allegations are serious, yet once this court has granted interim bail and the petitioner has joined investigation and also in view of the fact that the main accused viz. the son is still in custody and more so, since as per learned counsel, the minor children have to be looked after, it would be in the interest of justice to confirm the order dated 04.04.2011. Petition stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE July 08, 2011 sunita