Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
AMARJOT BHATTI
Tarandeep Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Amarjot Bhatti, J.
1. Petitioner has filed instant petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.90 dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 316 (2), 85 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered at Women Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana.
2. As per facts of the case, Doctor Guneet Kaur filed written complaint against her husband Tarandeep Singh and other members of in-laws family regarding harassment on account of demand of dowry. It is submitted that she is Dentist by profession. Her marriage was solemnized with Tarandeep Singh on 02.01.2017. Her parents had spent Rs.42.50 lakhs at the time of her marriage. She was given dowry articles as per their demand.
There was a condition that car should be given in marriage. Her parents took loan and purchased Honda City car. After marriage, in-laws family started taunting her that they should have given BMW vehicle. Her husband was also unhappy with the marriage. She was ill-treated on account of less dowry. It was alleged that dowry articles were of inferior quality. She was told to do entire work in the kitchen. Her husband harassed her by commenting on her a
The court determines that allegations of dowry demand do not justify custodial interrogation at the stage of anticipatory bail consideration.
The conduct of the accused is critical in determining anticipatory bail; misuse of interim protection can lead to denial of bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
