Ashok Srivastava, J.;— This bail application has been moved on behalf of applicant Pintoo alias Rakesh who is involved in Case Crime No. 114 of 2012, under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and of D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, district Ghaziabad. 2. The complainant of this case is one Naresh Kumar Kashyap. He moved an application before the court of learned Magistrate, Ghaziabad under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in which he has stated that he got his daughter Laxmi married to the applicant Pintoo alias Rakesh on 9.2.2010 and given away a lot of articles as gift and spent a substantial amount of money in the marriage. On 18.10.2011 a male child was born to the couple. On the eve of Chhochhak ceremony, the applicant alongwith his relatives demanded a sum of Rs. 1 lac from the complainant and when the latter showed his inability to pay the sum, Smt. Laxmi was turned out of her nuptial home by the applicant. Thereafter a Panchayat was called and upon intervention of some respectable members of the Biradari the applicant took alongwith him his wife. On 13.5.2012 at about 7.00 P.M. the applicant with the aid of his family members poured kerosene oil on the body of Laxmi and set her on fire. On an alarm being raised the neighbours reached at the scene and extinguished the fire. The complainant was informed of this incident who rushed to the nuptial home of his daughter and got her admitted in the hospital where she was medically examined and it was found that the burn injuries existing upon her body were about 25%. The injury report was prepared on 15.5.2012. The complainant tried to lodge an F.I.R. with the police but in vain, therefore, on 14.6.2012 he moved an application before the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The said application was allowed and the F.I.R. was lodged at Case Crime No. 114 of 2012 at Police Station Masoorie, district Ghaziabad. The matter was entrusted for investigation to S.I. Rajendra Singh, C.D. Cell, Ghaziabad. The matter was entrusted for investigation to S.I. Rajendra Singh, C.D. Cell, Ghaziabad. On 10.12.2012, as is said from the side of the applicant, Smt. Laxmi Devi moved an application before the S.S.P., Ghaziabad alongwith an affidavit in which she stated that some persons gave wrong advice to her father and instigated him to lodge an F.I.R. against the applicant and his family members whereupon her father lodged a false F.I.R. through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. In the said affidavit it was further stated that after the marriage Smt. Laxmi was living separately with her husband and there was no dispute between them. In the affidavit it has also been mentioned that neither the applicant nor his relatives ever demanded any dowry from the father of Laxmi Devi nor they tortured her for the purpose. It is also stated in the said affidavit that on 13.5.2012 her clothes accidently caught fire causing burn injuries to her. It has further been mentioned in the said affidavit that it was the applicant who got her treated. When such application was given to the S.S.P., Ghaziabad he marked it to the I.O. On the basis of such affidavit the I.O. exonerated the applicant from the offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. but surprisingly enough he filed a chargesheet against the applicant under Section 498-A/504/506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act. 3. It has been submitted from the side of the applicant that he is innocent and has committed no offence. It has further been submitted that he is a victim of the enmity of his father-in-law. It has also been submitted that the wife of the applicant has compromised the case and therefore she moved an application before the S.S.P., Ghaziabad alongwith an affidavit. Much reliance has been placed upon this affidavit and the application. 4. The bail application has been vehemently opposed by the learned A.G.A. He stated that there is nothing in the case diary which may justify the action on the part of the I.O. to exonerate the applicant from the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. 5. After perusing the record I summoned the I.O. of the case. It was informed that the Investigating Officer S.I. Rajendra Singh has retired. S.H.O. of Mahila Thana Ms. Narendri Modi appeared before this Court and filed an affidavit. After perusing the record I summoned the I.O. of the case. It was informed that the Investigating Officer S.I. Rajendra Singh has retired. S.H.O. of Mahila Thana Ms. Narendri Modi appeared before this Court and filed an affidavit. She informed that in pursuance of the order passed by the learned court at Ghaziabad while rejecting the bail application of the applicant, an inquiry has been initiated against the I.O. of the case S.I. Rajendra Singh. 6. In the instant case it has been claimed by the applicant that the victim Smt. Laxmi Devi has compromised the matter with the applicant. It has also been pleaded that it is a family affair and since the wife has compromised the matter applicant is entitled to be released on bail. It was also argued before me that the burn injuries are only 25% and therefore, it could not be said that it is a case under Section 307 I.P.C. In this continuation it has further been submitted that the applicant has been exonerated by the I.O. in the offence of attempted murder. 7. Such arguments are not tenable at least before the High Court. From perusal of the records it is apparent that the I.O. has played mischief. If he relied upon the affidavit filed by the victim he should have produced her before the Magistrate for her examination under Section 164 Cr.P.C. but he has not done so. Further, if he has believed the affidavit he should have believed the same as a whole and not partly. In that event he should have filed a final report in this case against all the family members including the applicant but he has not done so. In the instant case had Laxmi Devi compromised the matter with the applicant, the applicant could have filed an affidavit with this bail application from the side of his wife containing the fact that she has compromised with her husband but this has not been done. Whether the affidavit and application reference whereof has been given above have been actually filed by the victim or not is doubtful. In the instant case the victim has levelled specific allegations against her husband and his family members which make out a case under Section 307 I.P.C. also. The applicant is the husband of the victim. The alleged offence has taken place in his residential house. In the instant case the victim has levelled specific allegations against her husband and his family members which make out a case under Section 307 I.P.C. also. The applicant is the husband of the victim. The alleged offence has taken place in his residential house. He has failed to explain properly the burn injuries appearing on the person of his wife. In these circumstances I do not feel proper to release the applicant on bail. 8. Therefore, the bail application is rejected. 9. Before parting with this order I direct the S.S.P., Ghaziabad to initiate an inquiry against the S.I. (Retd.) Rajendra Singh, C.D. Cell, Ghaziabad if no inquiry has already been initiated against him in this case. Thereafter he will take appropriate action against the said retired S.I. as per law. 10. Let a copy of this order be sent to S.S.P., Ghaziabad by speed post for his information and to carry out the directions given to him above. _____________