GAIN CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have filed this application for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 397 dated 3. 8. 1997, registered at Police Station Pundri, District Kaithal, for the offence under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. Interim anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners. Thereafter, the complainant made an application being Crl. M. 27518 of 1997 to implead her as respondent No. 2. The said application was allowed. The complainant had also earlier submitted written statement alongwith documents. The same is also being taken into consideration.

(2.) 1 have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the learned Counsel for the State and learned Counsel for the complainant-respondent No. 2.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the complainant has vehemently objected to the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. He has produced the translated version of the FIR at Annexure R1 and has contended that the petitioners while reproducing the FIR have dropped certain portions and they have deliberately done it and therefore, pentitioners should not be granted anticipatory bail. The petitioners have reproduced the FIR in the petition itself. Comparing it with Annexure R1, it is apparent that certain portion of the FIR is missing. However, it can be found that in the FIr reproduced in the petition, the petitioners have mentioned of giving the dowry, taunting by the petitioners for not giving dowry articles, as per status, threatening divorce if Rs. 35,000/- were not paid, payment of Rs. 35,000/- by the brother of the complainant to the mother-in-law and father-in-law, obtaining signatures of the complainant on blank papers, giving her medicines under the pretext of her ailment and thereby intoxicating her, meeting convened by the complainant's brother, convening of Panchayat on 21. 2. 1995, harassment subsequent to holding of Panchayat and further demand of Rs. 50,000/-, her being not taken in the house for non-fulfilment of the demand of Rs. 50,000/-, convening of a meeting by her brother, uncle Sat Pal Sharma, Dr. Narain Sharma and other close relatives and other respectable persons like R. P. Attri and Ram Nath taking the complainant to Teha on 24. 2. 1996, mis-appropriation of dowry articles when the Panchayat reached there, turning of the complainant and all the relatives out from the house, lodging of DDR No. 23 dated 24. 2. 1996 at Police Station, Bilaspur, convening Panchayat of Brahman Sabha three days thereafter regarding not allowing the relatives to enter the house and shifting of the dowry articles, the meeting being attended by other respectable persons of the village, father-in-law and husband of the complainant feeling sorry at the meeting for the demand of dowry, beating and mis-appropriation of dowry articles etc. and the promise that the complainant will be treated nicely.