Punjab and Haryana High Court: Fateh Deep Singh, J. granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, the father of the bride, while observing that marriages are given contractual tinge and are getting rampant notoriety in the State of Punjab.
Petitioner came up with the first anticipatory bail in a case bearing FIR under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC.
Allegations against petitioner, the father the bride, were that he married his daughter to the complainant as per the arrangement entered between the two sides.
In view of the arrangement, boy, i.e. the complainant was to spend the money to facilitate immigration of the couple to Canada. Wife, thereafter went to Canada after the complainant side had incurred Rs 28/30 lakhs but did not call the husband to Canada leading to the registration of the present case against the petitioner alleging that the complainant’s family have been deceived.
Petitioner’s counsel, R.S. Manhas submitted that it is a pure matrimonial dispute and it was by sheer providence the boy did not qualify for immigration and, therefore, cannot be given the colour of criminality and has sought to denounce the applicability of Section 420 IPC.
Senior DAG, Punjab, Amit Mehta contended that accused side has committed a serious fraud with the complainant party and there is a necessity of custodial interrogation.
Migrated to Canada
On appreciating the evidence placed, Court noted that the girl has been successful in migrating to Canada and the boy had failed to do so the said dispute apparently appears to be a matrimonial dispute.
Keeping in view such like matters whereby marriages are given contractual tinge and are getting rampant notoriety in the State of Punjab, Courts cannot shut its eyes to such shocking reality whereby marriages are being relegated to contracts for attainment of such sinister designs and, thus, a debatable issue arises over the very applicability of Section 420 IPC.
In view of the above observation, petitioner was directed to appear before the investigating officer.
Petitioner shall continue to join investigation and shall furnish an undertaking that he shall abide by the conditions specified under Section 438(2) CrPC. Thereafter, he will be permitted to furnish regular bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Hence petition stood disposed of. [Satpal Singh v. State of Punjab, CRM-M-12011 of 2020 (O&M), decided on 15-07-2020]