Judgment M.L.Singhal, J. 1. Through this criminal misc. petition, Nikhilesh-petitioner has prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to him in Case FIR No. 127 dated 27.4.1999 registered Under Sections 304-B/302/498-A of the Indian Penal Code at PS Baldev Nagar, Ambala City. 2. Facts : Shriya @ Shelly, daughter of Satish Kumar son of Malik Charid, caste Khatri was married to Nischal son of Naresh Kumar Bhagi on 2.10.1998 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. As per him he had given dowry beyond his capacity. He had given Rs. one lac in cash to the in-laws of his daughter Shriya, which was meant for the furniture and other items. She was kept nicely by her husband for about two months of marriage. On the occasion of Diwali, Satish Kumar gave gifts to the in-laws of his daughter. 2lA months after Diwali, Satish Kumar received a telephonic call from his daughter Shriya that she was being mal-treated/ill-treated by her husband Nischal, mother-in-law Suniti Anand Bhagi, father-in-law Naresh Kumar, devar Nikhilesh and his wife Rekha that her father had not given colour TV and he should have give colour TV. Thereupon, Satish Kumar and his wife Neelam went to the house of in-laws of Shriya. At that time/his son-in-law Nischal, his father Naresh Kumar, mother Suniti Anand Bhagi, younger brother Nikhilesh and his wife Rekha were available at the house. Satish Kumar and his wife requested them that they were poor and they had already given dowry beyond their reach and they were not in a position to give anything more. They did not appreciate that they were not in a position to afford more. When they could not appreciate their inability to afford more, they told them that they will arrange money in a couple of days and give them. In the month of January, 1999 they gave TV to the in-laws of their daughter Shriya after its purchase from Ambala Cantt. In the month of March, 1999, Satish Kumar, his brother Harish Kumar and friend Subhash Singal s/o Jitender Singal went to Ambala City. They thought that they should visit the in-laws of Shriya for knowing their welfare. At that time, they were available in the house. Nikhilesh and his wife Rekha started saying that they had not given gold necklace in marriage. They thought that they should visit the in-laws of Shriya for knowing their welfare. At that time, they were available in the house. Nikhilesh and his wife Rekha started saying that they had not given gold necklace in marriage. Thereupon, Satish Kumar, his brother Harish Kumar and friend Subhash Singal told them that they were poor unable to fulfill their ever increasing demands. His son-in-law Nischal, Nikhilesh and Rekha told them that if they could not give gold necklace, they could not take Shriya with them. Satish Kumar then promised that if some time was given, he shall give them the necklace. After some days, he gave 4 tolas of gold necklace to the in-laws of his daughter. Still the in-laws of his daughter did not feel pleased and continued harassing her. On 26.4.1999, at about 7.00 p.m. some lady from Model Town made a telephonic call that Shriya had been administered some poisonous substance by her in-laws. Thereupon he alongwith his wife Neelam and son Ankit reached Model Town where they came to know that Shriya had been taken to Civil Hospital, Ambala. At Civil Hospital, Ambala they came to know that Shriya had already died. His daughter was done to death by her husband Nischal, his father-in-law Naresh Kumar, Bhagi, mother Suniti Anand Bhagi, devar Nikhilesh and his wife Rekha by giving her some poisonous substance as she did not satisfy their lust for dowry. 3. It was submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that Shriya was married on 2.10.1998. She died on 26.4.1999. If she had been given poison, she would riot have been taken to Civil Hospital, Ambala by her in-laws. They would have allowed her to die and cremated the dead body without letting anybody know about the cause of death. It was submitted that she herself took poison and committed suicide and that was why the police find it to be a case falling within the mischief of Section 306, I.P.C. Police challaned only Nischal husband of Shriya Under Section 306, I.P.C. and did not challan Nischals father, mother, younger brother and his younger brothers wife Rekha. It was submitted that the police found them innocent and they kept them in column number two of challan. It was submitted that the police found them innocent and they kept them in column number two of challan. It was submitted that Subhash Singal whom Satish Kumar says his friend has made statement Under Section 161, Cr.P.C. where he has not supported the story set up by Satish Kumar. It was submitted that they have been summoned by the Court in the exercise of power vesting in it Under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure without examining evidence but on mere application of Satish Kumar moved Under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that they be summoned. 4. Learned AAG for the State of Haryana submitted that Shriya was married only on 2.10.1998. She died on 26.4.1999. Hers was an unnatural death. Why should she have died soon after her marriage if she was being treated well by her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, devar and devrani. 5. The prayer of Rekha and Nikhilesh for the grant of anticipatory bail it allowed as Nikhilesh is the younger brother of Nischal, husband of late Shriya while Rekha is Nikhileshs wife. During investigation Rekhas mother Sunita has stated that her daughter Rekha was in love with Nikhilesh. Theirs is love marriage. There was no demand for dowry by the in-laws of Rekha from them. She stated that no dowry was given by Shriyas father in marriage of Shriya to Nischal. The truth of statement of Sunita can be verified only at the trial. Fact however remains that Nikhilesh is the younger brother of Nischal while Rekha is Nikhileshs wife. It may or may not be true that they joined Nischal who is elder to them in the ill-treatment of his wife Shriya when Shriya had not brought adequate dowry. Even otherwise if Shriya had brought any dowry that would have benefited Shriya, her husband and her parents-in-law. That item could not have been used by Rekha and her husband Nikhilesh. It is, therefore, ordered that the learned Trial Court will call upon Rekha and Nikhilesh to furnish bail on their appearance. 6. It is further submitted that husband-Nischal alone has been challaned. His father Naresh Kumar, mother Suniti Anand Bhagi, younger brother Nikhilesh and Nikhileshs wife have been summoned by the Court in exercise of powers vesting in it Under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 7. 6. It is further submitted that husband-Nischal alone has been challaned. His father Naresh Kumar, mother Suniti Anand Bhagi, younger brother Nikhilesh and Nikhileshs wife have been summoned by the Court in exercise of powers vesting in it Under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 7. Husband-Nischal was allowed bail by the Magistrate Under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure because challan had not been submitted within 60 days of the date of his arrest. During investigation offence was turned down to 306, Indian Penal Code. After investigation, challan was submitted in Court Under Sections 304-B, 302, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. Trial Court framed charge Under Sections 304-B, 302, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against Nischal. He, however, continued to remain on bail in view of the orders passed by the Magistrate Under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. After the charge Under Sections 304-B, 302 and 498-A had been framed, the concession of bail allowed to Nischal was not withdrawn under the orders of this Court (Annexure P-l). Additional Sessions Judge (Trial Court), was directed to release Nischal on bail as he appears before him and moves application for bail. 8. Learned Counsel for Naresh Kumar and Suniti Anand Bhagi submits that Naresh Kumar, father and Suniti anand Bhagi, mother of Nischal also remained in custody for about two months when the case was in the stage of investigation. They were released when they were discharged by the Magistrate vide order dated 19.6.1999 on police request for their discharge. Learned Counsel submits that they have been summoned by the Trial Court Under Sections 304-B, 302, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code in exercise of power vesting in it Under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. No useful purpose would be served by sending him to jail over again, when Nischal who had been dubbed as the prime accused is on bail. 9. For the reasons given above, it is ordered that the Trial Court will call upon Naresh Kumar and his wife Suniti Anand Bhagi also to furnish bail to its satisfaction when they appear before him.