Spell out how accused failed to cooperate with probe, HC tells state

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 18

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that mere assertion on non-cooperation with the investigating agency was not enough for the state to oppose the grant of bail to an accused. The state was required to spell out the manner in which an accused failed to cooperate with the investigating agency.

“No doubt in case the accused does not cooperate with the investigating agency, an adverse inference can be drawn against him. However, the state must spell out as to in what manner the accused has failed to cooperate with the investigating agency,” Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul asserted.

In her detailed order, Justice Kaul added mere non-recovery of some disputed dowry items could by itself not be a ground for denial of bail to the accused. The ruling came on a petition filed against the state of Punjab and another respondent by an accused seeking the grant of anticipatory bail in an FIR registered on November 22, 2019, for subjecting a married woman to cruelty and criminal breach of trust under Sections 406 and 498A of the IPC at the Women Cell police station in Amritsar district.

His counsel submitted that the FIR was registered against the petitioner on account of a matrimonial dispute between the parties. Allegations of physical and mental harassment were levelled against him for not satisfying his dowry demands.

The counsel added the parties, unfortunately, failed to amicably settle their dispute before the High Court’s mediation and conciliation centre. Pursuant to an order passed by the court, the petitioner joined the investigation and handed over all the dowry articles in his possession, including a car given at the time of marriage.

The state counsel did not dispute the fact regarding the petitioner joining the investigation. He, however, submitted that the petitioner did not cooperate with the investigation as approximately 220 gram of gold ornaments were yet to be recovered. After hearing rival contentions, Justice Kaul allowed the plea.