PRABJIT KAUR AND ORS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As identical points for determination are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the indicated applications for anticipatory and regular bail, arising out of the same case/FIR, by virtue of this common order in order to avoid the repetition.

(2.) The contour of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant applications and emanating from the record, is that on 1.10.2011, Samandeep Kaur, daughter of Satinder Pal Singh, had left her house and was missing. Her husband-complainant Sarabjeet Singh searched for her, but in vain. On Criminal Misc. Nos.M-34615 & 36073 of 2011 -2- 10.10.2011, the complainant came to know that petitioner Rajbir Singh son of Santokh Singh, had enticed her away. On 10.10.2011, he reported the matter to the police. In the back ground of these allegations and in the wake of statement of the complainant, the present case was registered against the petitioners-accused, by way of FIR No.87 dated 10.10.2011 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under section 366 IPC only, by the police of Police Station Jhansa, District Kurukshetra in the manner depicted hereinbefore.

(3.) Aggrieved by the registration of the case, petitioners Prabjit Kaur @ Paramjeet Kaur & Santokh Singh, have preferred the application for anticipatory bail, invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr.PC., whereas their son Rajbir Singh petitioner filed the application for grant of regular bail, invoking the provisions of Section 439 Cr.PC.