DAMINI Vs. UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in the present petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.179 dtd. 14/11/2021 registered under Ss. 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Central Sector 17, Chandigarh.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case, the petitioner deserves the concession of anticipatory bail inasmuch the questions which has been put to the petitioner in the reply dtd. 13/12/2021 (Annexure P-3) by the UT Police, the petitioner is ready to answer the same and cooperate with the investigation. It is argued that the petitioner is a lady and thus, she deserves the concession of anticipatory bail and for the said purpose, reference has been made to Sec. 437 of Cr.P.C. to contend that lenient view should be taken in favour of the petitioner. For the said purpose, he has relied upon judgment dtd. 12/10/2020 passed in CRM-M-30698-2020 by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in case titled Santosh Kumari Vs. State of Haryana.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that there is possibility in the present case that the petitioner, being a poor lady, has been dragged in the case by the real culprits and she is herself the victim. It is further argued that the name of the petitioner has nowhere been mentioned in the FIR and has only came out in the disclosure statement of the main accused Ranjit Singh.