Amardeep Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Another - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1120532
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJan-15-2014
AppellantAmardeep Singh
RespondentState of Haryana and Another
Excerpt:
crl. misc. no.m-37333 of 2013 -1- in the high court for the states of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crl. misc. no.m-37333 of 2013 date of decision: 15.01.2014 amardeep singh …petitioner versus state of haryana and another …respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice amol rattan singh present:- mr.parminder singh, advocate for the petitioner. mr.sandeep s. mann, sr.dag, haryana mr.sukhraj singh brar, advocate for the complainant. *** amol rattan singh, j. this petition seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been named, along with his father and mother, as an accused in fir no.332, dated 26.09.2013, registered by his wife, in respect of offences punishable under sections 323, 498a, 406, 504, 506, 34, 120-b ipc, at police station, city dabwali, district sirsa. at the time when notice was issued on 07.11.2013, mr.parminder singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, had submitted that, as can be seen from the photographs (annexure p-10) and the fact that the complainant was also given a gold chain worth rs.43,000/-, by the petitioners.mother upon payment having been made for the same by the petitioner as per his credit card statement (annexure p-7).it was obvious that the complainant was never harassed and further that the petitioner, in any case, is willing to discharge his matrimonial obligation chander vikas 2014.01.16 17:05 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crl. misc. no.m-37333 of 2013 -2- of living with the complainant or, on the other hand, if she so desires, to give her a divorce also. upon the above statement, interim bail had been granted to the petitioner vide the above said order, by this court, at the time when notice was issued. thereafter, the matter had been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner, as also by mr.sukhraj singh brar, learned counsel for the complainant, along with the state counsel. mr.parminder singh had then further argued that an lic policy was also subscribed to, in the joint names of the petitioner and the complainant, premium for which had been paid by the petitiioners.parents. he further argued that the studies of the complainant for the cours.of bachelor in education, had also been paid for by the petitioners.father, after transferring the fee amount in the name of the father of the complainant, as is obvious from a perusal of annexures p- 6, p-7 and p-8, which show a transfer of an amount of rs.31,000/- on 19/20-01-2011, from the account of the petitioners.father to that of the father of the complainant. he again drew attention to the photographs annexed with the petition, showing the petitioner and complainant happily together, on their way to and at goa, in august 2011, with the expenses for the air tickets statedly having borne by the petitioner. it was further contended by sh. parminder singh that, basically, it is the complainant who, being a highly qualified lady, has a haughty attitude, owing to which she used to pick up quarrels on small chander vikas 2014.01.16 17:05 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crl. misc. no.m-37333 of 2013 -3- matters.due to this, the petitioner and the complainant also started residing on a different floor of the house of the petitioners.parents, in support of which contention, a ration card is also referred to. per contra, mr.sukhraj singh brar has argued that, initially, a matrimonial dispute had arisen, after which the petitioner filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, whereupon the matter was compromised. however, thereafter, the complainant was again harassed at the hands of the petitioner and on account of such repeated harassments, she is now no longer willing to compromise with him, even though he had filed another petition under section 9 of the hindu marriage act, 1955. mr.brar further submits, upon instructions from the complainant, who was present in court, that she also gave up her job, on the instructions of the petitioners.family, he also reiterated the contents of the fir, to the effect that she was harassed for dowry and after her husbands' promotion in his job, the pressure upon her was increased, to bring more dowry, including a swift car, on account of his enhanced status. mr.brar also stated that the petitioner had, in fact, beaten the complainant and even tried to strangulate her at one point; however, the matter was compromised with the intervention of some relatives etc.and for sometime the couple lived together happily. thereafter, the harassment is again alleged to have been re-started, as noted above, on account of which, the complainant is unable to live in her matrimonial home any longer. chander vikas 2014.01.16 17:05 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crl. misc. no.m-37333 of 2013 -4- keeping all the allegations in view, along with the vehement arguments thereupon by learned counsel for the complainant, without commenting, obviously, upon the merits of these allegations at this stage, i find myself unable to allow the petitioner to continue to remain on the concession of anticipatory bail and, consequently, this petition is dismissed and the interim order dated 07.11.2013 is hereby vacated. however, nothing said hereinabove will influence the investigating agency in investigating into the allegations made in the fir, nor would the above observations be taken into consideration by any trial court, if the matter actually comes to that stage. january 15, 2014 (amol rattan singh) vcgarg judge note: 1. whether reporters of local papers 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?. chander vikas 2014.01.16 17:05 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
Judgment:

Crl.

Misc.

No.M-37333 of 2013 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.

Misc.

No.M-37333 of 2013 Date of Decision: 15.01.2014 Amardeep Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH Present:- Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Sandeep S.

Mann, Sr.DAG, Haryana Mr.Sukhraj Singh Brar, Advocate for the complainant.

*** Amol Rattan Singh, J.

This petition seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been named, along with his father and mother, as an accused in FIR No.332, dated 26.09.2013, registered by his wife, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 406, 504, 506, 34, 120-B IPC, at Police Station, City Dabwali, District Sirsa.

At the time when notice was issued on 07.11.2013, Mr.Parminder Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, had submitted that, as can be seen from the photographs (Annexure P-10) and the fact that the complainant was also given a gold chain worth Rs.43,000/-, by the petitioneRs.mother upon payment having been made for the same by the petitioner as per his credit card statement (Annexure P-7).it was obvious that the complainant was never harassed and further that the petitioner, in any case, is willing to discharge his matrimonial obligation Chander Vikas 2014.01.16 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl.

Misc.

No.M-37333 of 2013 -2- of living with the complainant or, on the other hand, if she so desires, to give her a divorce also.

Upon the above statement, interim bail had been granted to the petitioner vide the above said order, by this Court, at the time when notice was issued.

Thereafter, the matter had been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner, as also by Mr.Sukhraj Singh Brar, learned counsel for the complainant, along with the State counsel.

Mr.Parminder Singh had then further argued that an LIC policy was also subscribed to, in the joint names of the petitioner and the complainant, premium for which had been paid by the petitiioneRs.parents.

He further argued that the studies of the complainant for the couRs.of Bachelor in Education, had also been paid for by the petitioneRs.father, after transferring the fee amount in the name of the father of the complainant, as is obvious from a perusal of Annexures P- 6, P-7 and P-8, which show a transfer of an amount of Rs.31,000/- on 19/20-01-2011, from the account of the petitioneRs.father to that of the father of the complainant.

He again drew attention to the photographs annexed with the petition, showing the petitioner and complainant happily together, on their way to and at Goa, in August 2011, with the expenses for the air tickets statedly having borne by the petitioner.

It was further contended by Sh.

Parminder Singh that, basically, it is the complainant who, being a highly qualified lady, has a haughty attitude, owing to which she used to pick up quarrels on small Chander Vikas 2014.01.16 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl.

Misc.

No.M-37333 of 2013 -3- matteRs.Due to this, the petitioner and the complainant also started residing on a different floor of the house of the petitioneRs.parents, in support of which contention, a ration card is also referred to.

Per contra, Mr.Sukhraj Singh Brar has argued that, initially, a matrimonial dispute had arisen, after which the petitioner filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, whereupon the matter was compromised.

However, thereafter, the complainant was again harassed at the hands of the petitioner and on account of such repeated harassments, she is now no longer willing to compromise with him, even though he had filed another petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Mr.Brar further submits, upon instructions from the complainant, who was present in Court, that she also gave up her job, on the instructions of the petitioneRs.family, He also reiterated the contents of the FIR, to the effect that she was harassed for dowry and after her husbands' promotion in his job, the pressure upon her was increased, to bring more dowry, including a Swift Car, on account of his enhanced status.

Mr.Brar also stated that the petitioner had, in fact, beaten the complainant and even tried to strangulate her at one point; however, the matter was compromised with the intervention of some relatives etc.and for sometime the couple lived together happily.

Thereafter, the harassment is again alleged to have been re-started, as noted above, on account of which, the complainant is unable to live in her matrimonial home any longer.

Chander Vikas 2014.01.16 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl.

Misc.

No.M-37333 of 2013 -4- Keeping all the allegations in view, along with the vehement arguments thereupon by learned counsel for the complainant, without commenting, obviously, upon the merits of these allegations at this stage, I find myself unable to allow the petitioner to continue to remain on the concession of anticipatory bail and, consequently, this petition is dismissed and the interim order dated 07.11.2013 is hereby vacated.

However, nothing said hereinabove will influence the investigating agency in investigating into the allegations made in the FIR, nor would the above observations be taken into consideration by any trial Court, if the matter actually comes to that stage.

January 15, 2014 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH) vcgarg JUDGE Note: 1.

Whether Reporters of local papers 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?.

Chander Vikas 2014.01.16 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh