206 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-70185-2025 Date of Decision:- 12.02.2026 RATAN KUMAR ....Petitioner Vs.

STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Manjot Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

None for respondent No.2.

*****

AMARJOT BHATTI, J.

1. Petitioner Ratan Kumar has filed instant petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.115 dated 05.11.2025 under Sections 316 (2) and 85 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered at Police Station Women Cell, Jalandhar.

2. As per facts of the case, complainant Harvir Gill filed written complaint against her husband Ratan Kumar and other members of in-laws family on account of demand of dowry. She stated that her marriage was performed with Ratan Kumar on 03.01.2024. Out of this wedlock, she is having a daughter. Soon after marriage, she was harassed by her husband and members of in-laws family on account of their demand for more dowry in the shape of gold ornaments and other articles as detailed in the FIR. Harassment continued. Her husband started raising demand for Brezza car. On 07.04.2025, she returned to her parent’s house on account of continuous harassment and filed the complaint.

3. Learned counsel representing petitioner argued that he was granted interim relief vide order dated 12.12.2025 and in pursuance of this, he has handed over all dowry articles to the investigating agency. Counsel representing petitioner has also placed on record copy of recovery memo vide which dowry articles were taken into police possession. Petitioner is still ready and willing to join the investigation as and when required.

4. Status report filed confirming the facts narrated in the FIR. It is confirmed that as per directions of this Court petitioner joined investigation on 27.01.2026. Recovery of dowry articles is also confirmed. It is further stated on instructions of ASI Tarsem Kaur that petitioner is not required for further investigation.

So far as respondent No.2 is concerned, despite her service through father nobody has turned up.

5. I have considered the aforesaid factual position. FIR is lodged on account of matrimonial dispute. Petitioner has joined the investigation. Dowry articles are also recovered. He is still ready to cooperate with the investigating agency. Therefore, no purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars. Considering the aforesaid factual position, anticipatory bail petition filed by petitioner is allowed. He be not arrested. In case of his arrest, he be released on bail to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer concerned, subject to condition that petitioner will join investigation as and when required. He will not tamper with or interfere with investigation and will not leave country without prior permission as provided under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023.

6. Pending misc. application, if any, stands disposed of.

(AMARJOT BHATTI)

JUDGE

12.02.2026 s(cid:1)(cid:2)