HARPREET KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is seeking cancellation of bail granted to respondent No.2 vide order dated 28.03.2016 in FIR No. 67 dated 02.11.2015, registered under Sections 406/498-A Penal Code at Police Station Women Cell Jalandhar, District Jalandhar.

(2.) The counsel refers to the judgments Puran Vs. Rambilas 2001(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 801 : 2001(5) BCR 830 & Sarita Vs. State of Rajasthan 2011(1) Crl. L.R. 353 and urges that the Investigating Officer had made a statement in the Court that gold ornaments and other dowry articles were yet to be recovered, but the Court made the interim order absolute. It was urged that since an undertaking had been given by Jagjeet Singh that there would return all the gift items, therefore bail should not have been allowed to respondent No.2.

(3.) Perusal of Annexure P-2 shows that the undertaking is said to have been given by Jagjit Singh father of Charanpreet Singh on behalf of the son. The trial Court directed respondent No.2 to join the investigation. He had joined the investigation subsequently and pursuant to the interim order, some recovery was also effected which is noted in Para 3 of the order. Thereafter, the Court below relying upon two judgments Bhupinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 109 & Anil Rajput and others Vs. State of Haryana, 2010(6) RCR (Criminal), 1126 made the order absolute.