High CourtsSingle Bench

Vashist Mishra And Another vs State Of U.T., Chandigarh

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 16 December 2020 · Citation: (2020) 12 P&H CK 0279

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 406, 498A · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 16524 Of 2020 (O&M)
Ask AI about this case

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

20 paragraphs · 314 words

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J

The petitioners pray for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR

No.164 dated 30.11.2019 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC, registered at Police Station : Women Police Station, Chandigarh, U.T., Chandigarh.

The operative part of the order dated 25.06.2020, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioners, is reproduced as under:-

“....Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the parents-in-law of the complainant and they were granted the concession of

interim bail by the Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 18.3.2020.

Counsel for the petitioners further submits that, however, on account of COVID-19 situation, they, being aged about 50 years, could not join the

investigation and are ready to join the investigation.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Sukant Gupta, Additional P.P. for U.T., Chandigarh, who is appearing through video conferencing, accepts notice on behalf of the State.

Learned Counsel appearing for the U.T., Chandigarh submits that the husband of the complainant (son of the petitioner) was arrested and during his

remand, some dowry articles were recovered. He has already been granted the concession of regular bail. He further submits that recovery of some

more articles is yet to be effected....â€​

Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 25.06.2020, the petitioners have appeared before the Investigating

Officer and have joined the investigation.

Counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Krishan Kumar, and assisted by counsel for the complainant has not disputed the aforesaid fact and

submits that the petitioners are no more required for further investigation. It is also submitted that both the petitioners, who are parents-in-law have

joined the investigation and some dowry articles have also been recovered.

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioners vide order dated 25.06.2020 is made absolute subject to the

conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.