Amandeep Kaur v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CRM-M-638-2020 (O&M).

Decided on: February 17, 2020.

Amandeep Kaur .. Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab .. Respondent * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI * * * PRESENT Mr.Bhawesh Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab.

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (ORAL ) Through the present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the petitioner prays for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.37 dated 13.04.2019, under Sections 306/34 IPC, registered at Police Station, Lambran, District Jalandhar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case a false FIR has been registered against the petitioner and she had nothing to do with the suicide which was committed by her husband namely Amarjeet Singh. It was further submitted that in fact there was no abetment by the petitioner in the suicide of her husband Amarjeet Singh and therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that a perusal of the FIR would show that there are direct allegations against the petitioner for abetting the suicide of her husband and not only this even suicide note was also left by the deceased and the video clipping is also available in the shape of C.D. and that the matter is serious in nature and the witnesses are yet to be examined in the present case. He has further stated that during investigation, the police had also seen the video in which the deceased has specifically named the petitioner for causing abetment to commit suicide. He has further submitted that as per the FIR petitioner was a widow and had a son and thereafter her marriage with the brother of the complainant namely Amarjeet Singh was performed and both of them started living in their village.

As per the FIR deceased Amarjeet Singh went to Delhi and the petitioner went to her home in Basti Daneshmanda on 9.4.2019 and Amarjeet Singh came back from Delhi. On 11.4.2019, Balwant Singh, Sukhwant Singh and petitioner went to village Nahal where all of them quarreled and Balwant Singh and Sukhwant Singh left. Petitioner along with her son went to her home at Basti Daneshmanda and thereafter, she fought with deceased Amarjeet Singh and went away. Thereafter, all these brothers came to the house of deceased Amarjeet Singh who told them everything including that they will come back and talk in the evening. Around 6:00 P.M.

also written a suicide note.

Learned State counsel has submitted that in such like situations where in the suicide note abetment has been attributed, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail as the matter is serious in nature and there is every likelihood that petitioner may influence the witnesses during the trial.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and perused the paper book. Learned counsel for the petitioner although argued that petitioner is innocent and had got nothing to do with the suicide but fact remains that in the suicide note and the video which the deceased had made before committing suicide, as stated by the learned State counsel, the petitioner is named in the video who is said to have abetted the suicide. Learned State counsel has also taken a stand that there is every likelihood that the petitioner may influence the witnesses during trial. Therefore, considering the totality of the circumstances of the case, I do not deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner, at this stage. The petition is hereby dismissed, at this stage. However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on merits of the case and is meant for the purpose of deciding the present petition only. February 17, 2020.

(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No