JUDGMENT Mr. Ram Chand Gupta, J. (Oral) - The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.167 dated 18.05.2013, under Sections 323/406/498A/506/34 IPC, registered at police station Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioners. 3. On 03.06.2013, Coordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order:- “Mr. H.P.S.Ishar, Advocate has filed power of attorney on behalf of complainant, who is also present in person in Court. A perusal of the petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed inter-se parties would go on to show that no amount was specified regarding the maintenance of the complainant. Joint statement was recorded on 4.1.2013 wherein it is mentioned that the parties had settled all the dispute and nothing was due. The FIR was lodged subsequently on 18.5.2013 in which allegations were made that a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- had been agreed to be paid to compensate the complainant and they will pay a sum of Rs.3 lacs after recording first statement in the joint divorce petition. It is further alleged that only Rs.50,000/- had been paid to the grand father of the complainant and assurance has been made to make balance payment within three days. Counsel for the petitioners states that balance amount of Rs.2,50,000/- will be deposited with the District Judge, Family Court, Ambala since there is consensus that the said amount was to be paid at the first motion. He prays for a week’s’ time to do the needful. The said amount be kept in fixed deposit on its deposit by the petitioners. Needless to say that the deposit is without prejudice to the rights of the complainant since counsel for the complainant contends that Rs.5,50,000/- had been agreed upon as full and final settlement. On deposit of the said amount, the petitioners who are inlaws of the complainant shall be released on interim bail in case they are arrested by the Investigating Officer and they shall comply with all the conditions under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. To come up on 5.8.2013.” 4. On deposit of the said amount, the petitioners who are inlaws of the complainant shall be released on interim bail in case they are arrested by the Investigating Officer and they shall comply with all the conditions under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. To come up on 5.8.2013.” 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have already deposited a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- with the District Judge, Family Court, Ambala as per aforementioned order of this Court and that they have also joined the investigation pursuant to the said order. 5. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from SI Rajpal Singh, that petitioners have deposited Rs.2,50,000/- with the District Judge, Family Court, Ambala and they have also joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation. Bail application is not opposed. 6. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. 7. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Bhagwanti and Prem Chand is accepted and order dated 03.06.2013 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 8. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ---------0.B.S.0------------ —————————