R.C.KATHURIA,J - (1.) HEARD . Petitioner Ranjit Singh was filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') praying for grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing First Information Report No. 294 dated 17.8.2001 under Sections 376/420/406, Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station City Kapurthala.
(2.) THE present case was registered on the statement of Sat Pal Kaur daughter of Manjit Singh, resident of Mohalla Guru Nanak Pura, District Kapurthala. Complainant Sat Pal Kaur had married one Harish Kumar on 8.12.1988. Three sons were born to her out of said wedlock. She was harassed and maltreated by Harish Kumar, with the result that her marriage with him ended in divorce in 1998. According to the allegations made in the First Information Report, the complainant came into contact with the petitioner and on the assurance that he would marry the complainant and give his name to her children, she started living with him as his wife. According to her, she sold her house situated in Mohalla Ajit Nagar for Rs. 3,35,000/- and out of this amount she gave Rs. 1,35,000/- to the petitioner for the purchase of a vehicle. With this amount, he purchased Tempo bearing registration No. PB-09C-9752. Thereafter, the petitioner married Balwinder Kaur resident of Gobindgarh on 7.5.2001. According to the assertion of complainant Sat Pal Kaur, the petitioner duped her, which led to the registration of the present case against him. Counsel representing the petitioner, while pressing for bail, has submitted before me that taking the allegations made in the First Information Report on their face value, no case has been made out against the petitioner. The petitioner had purchased the vehicle in question bearing registration No. PB-09C-9752 after getting it financed from S.F. Finance Company and the vehicle was registered in the name of the petitioner. Marriage of the petitioner with Balwinder Kaur aforesaid was not disputed by him. Further, according to the petitioner, he had worked as a Driver with the complainant from April, 1998 upto January, 1999 and no salary was paid by her to him. Thereafter, he left the job and started working independently.
(3.) WHILE opposing the bail application, learned Assistant Advocate General stated that the amount given by complainant Sat Pal Kaur to the petitioner for the purchase of the vehicle in question is to be recovered by the prosecution.;