Full Text
CRL.M.C. 2215/2011
MAHESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Mohd. Kausar Parvez, Adv.
Mr. V.K. Gupta, Adv. for R-2/complainant along with complainant in person.
HON'BlE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
0/0 16.08.2011 CRl.M.C. 2215/2011
ORDER
1. Vide order dated 04.07.2011 passed by the learned ASJ, the petitioner was admitted to anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner shall pay a Demand Draft of RS.2Lacs in the name of the complainant within fifteen days.
2. Additionally, the dowry articles wer~ also directed to be returned to the complainant vide the order of the even date.
3. On 27.07.2007, the petitioner handed over a pay order to respondent No. 2 of Rs.50,000/- and vide order dated 28.07.2011, the petitioner was directed to pay the balance of RS.1.5Lacs and the Stridhan articles to the respondent.
4. Learned counsels for both the parties submit that the payment of RS.2Lacs has been done by the petitioner, and dowry articles has been returned partly. h 2011:DHC:9274 " -\ '~---l
5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the complete stridhan articles have not yet been returned and the petitioner has not complied with the order dated 18.07.201l.
6. I note that the case is against the petitioner under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and if any of the articles are not given to the respondent then the petitioner shall be dealt under Section 406 Indian Penal Code, 1860.
7. Since the entire amount as ordered in order dated 04.07.2011 has been paid and dowry articles which were in the possession of the petitioner have been given to the respondent, this petition is dismissed as being infructuous.
8. No order as to costs.
9. Dasti. CRL. M.A. 8038/2011 (STAY) The application is disposed of being infructuous. ~ SURESH KAIT,J --- AUGUST 16, 2011 j