Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajinder Shamsher Singh Kohli And Anr vs Ut Of Chandigarh on 23 December, 2014
Author: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
Bench: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
Criminal Misc.No.M-37129 of 2014 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.No.M-37129 of 2014
Date of Decision: December 23, 2014
Rajinder Shamsher Singh Kohli & Anr.
...Petitioners
Versus
Union Territory, Chandigarh
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr.Malkeet Singh, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr.G.S.Wasu, AAP,
for UT, Chandigarh.
Mr.Vikas Kumar, Advocate,
for the complainant.
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.(Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, namely, Rajinder Shamsher Singh and Ms.Sharda Kohli, who have been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 498-A, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.341, dated 04.09.2013, registered at Police Station, Sector 11, Chandigarh.
Learned counsel contends that the marriage of Swati was solemnized with Varundeep Kohli, son of the petitioners, on 04.12.2011 and thereafter, Varundeep Kohli left for Canada on 27.03.2012 while Swati stayed with the petitioners and kept nicely. On 13.12.2012 Swati went to Canada and she could not adjust with SEEMA RANI 2014.12.23 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Misc.No.M-37129 of 2014 [2] her husband and hence, the matter was reported to the police at Canada. Before leaving India, Swati never lodged any complaint before any authority with regard to bad conduct of the petitioners. It has also been contended that the competent court of jurisdiction at Canada has already granted a decree of divorce in favour of Swati. He further submits that just to widen the array of the accused, the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further contends that in compliance of the order dated 31.10.2014 passed by this Court, the petitioners have joined the investigation.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Iram Rajvi, Police Station, Sector 11, Chandigarh, submits that though the petitioners have joined the investigation but all the dowry articles could not be recovered from them.
Learned counsel for the complainant also opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners on the premise that at the time of marriage, they mis-represented to the complainant that their son was M.D.Ortho.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.
It is the conceded case of the prosecution that the son of the petitioners and husband of the complainant is Master in Physiotherapy (Orthopaedics). The marriage of the SEEMA RANI 2014.12.23 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Misc.No.M-37129 of 2014 [3] complainant with the son of the petitioners was solemnized on 04.12.2011 and thereafter, Varundeep Kohli (husband of the complainant) left for Canada on 27.03.2012. On 13.12.2012 Swati, the daughter-in-law of the petitioners, went to Canada to join the company of her husband Varundeep Kohli. They could not adjust themselves with each other hence, the matter was reported to the police at Canada. The Court at Canada has already granted a decree of divorce to the husband and the wife.
On a specific query, learned counsel for the State, after taking instructions from SI Iram Rajvi, Police Station, Sector 11, Chandigarh, fairly conceded that before leaving India, Swati had never lodged any complaint against the petitioners. The petitioners have joined the investigation and part recovery of the dowry articles has already been effected.
Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 31.10.2014 are made absolute.
The petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the conditions as laid down in Section 438(2), Cr.P.C.
December 23, 2014 (Naresh Kumar Sanghi)
seema Judge
SEEMA RANI
2014.12.23 16:45
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh