RANJIT SINGH - (1.) THIS order will dispose of two CRM-M Nos.34356 of 2011 (R.S.Sangwan Vs. State of Haryana) and 37004 of 2011 (Vikas Kumar Vs. State of Haryana) as the same have arisen out of the common FIR.
(2.) THE husband of the complainant has already filed a petition before the Court of Sessions. THE petitioners have directly approached this court for grant of anticipatory bail. Notice of motion was issued and arrest of the petitioners was stayed. Efforts were also made to amicably settle the issues on finding that Advocate of this Court is involved as an accused being father of the boy. However, the efforts were futile and the issues could not be amicably settled. THE father of the girl is also an Advocate. Majority of the jewellery articles and other dowry items have been recovered. It is stated that some cash was advanced for purchase of furniture, which is not returned so far. Majority of the jewellery articles and other dowry items have been returned. It would not be very fair to curtail the liberty of the petitioners only on the ground that some cash paid is yet to be recovered, when the payment of cash or quantum thereof is in serious dispute. Counsel appearing for the complainant, however, points out that the petitioners have directly approached this court for grant of anticipatory bail without first approaching the Court of Sessions. As per the counsel, there are no extra-ordinary circumstances pleaded to justify direct approach for bail before this court bypassing the Court of Sessions. The obvious reason, which can clearly be discerned from the record is that one of the accused is a counsel practicing in this court. This may initially be not an extra-ordinary circumstance to make a direct approach before this court, but may be a reason enough for the petitioners to have made direct approach before this court. It may not be fair now to relegate the petitioners to approach the Court of Sessions when Sessions Court and this court have concurrent jurisdiction in this regard.
(3.) THE husband of the complainant has approached the Court of Sessions. His petition is also now before this court once it was dismissed by the Court of Sessions. That would be an added reason to entertain these petitions that too at this stage when the case has progressed to finality.;