AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 231 wordsK.K. Srivastava, J.
CM is allowed and the recovery memo of dowry articles Annexure P7 is taken on record. It is not disputed that the petitioners have since joined the investigation of the case and a perusal of recovery memo, Annexure P7, shows that the dowry items have since been returned to the complainant side.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel and considering the averments made in the F.I.R., reproduced in the petition, the petitioners deserves to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Resultantly, this petition is allowed subject to the following conditions :
(1) In the event of arrest of the petitioners by the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer in F.I.R. No. 97, dated 21.07.1997, under Sections 406/498A/506/120B IPC, P.S. City Hoshiarpur, they shall be released on bail subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/ and one reliable surety, each, to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer/Arresting Officer.
(2) The petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so.
(3) The petitioners shall not temper with the prosecution evidence.
(4) The petitioners shall not leave the country without obtaining prior permission of competent court of jurisdiction.
This order of anticipatory bail shall remain operative till the trial court takes the cognizance of the case and summons the petitioners for trial. Disposed of accordingly.