Dilbag v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 2023:PHHC:106429 Date of decision: August 17th, 2023 Dilbag .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Mohit Giri, Advocate for the petitioner.



      

  MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) The petitioner is seeking the concession of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in case FIR No.230 dated 28.04.2022 under Sections 201, 302, 34, 450 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 302 and 450 IPC deleted and Sections 304 and 452 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Narnaund, District Hisar.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner, who has been in custody since 29.06.2022 has been falsely implicated in the case in hand. It has been further submitted that the deceased, Ramphal, was an alcoholic, as a result of which his wife had also deserted him many years prior to the occurrence in question. On 26.04.2022, the complainant son of Ramphal, deceased, who was living separately from his father, was informed by his sister that Ramphal had died. On reaching the house of the deceased, he was informed that Ramphal had already been cremated. It was two days

-2later, Ritu, wife of one of the co-accused Satyawan revealed to the complainant that his father had not died a natural death but all the accused including the petitioner, after breaking into the house of the deceased, had assaulted him on the fateful day. Learned counsel has still further vehemently contended that there is nothing to suggest on record qua the cause of death of the deceased as admittedly neither post-mortem was ever conducted on the dead body of the deceased nor was the deceased medically treated for the injuries allegedly inflicted on him.

3.

Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, has submitted that no doubt there was no post-mortem conducted and there was no opinion on record qua the cause of death of the deceased, however, it had come during investigation that the deceased succumbed to the injuries inflicted by the accused.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

5.

Prima facie, there appears to be no medical corroboration to the prosecution version qua the alleged assault and injuries sustained by the deceased.

6.

The petitioner has been now in custody since 29.06.2022. After the charges were framed on 16.11.2022, none of the prosecution witnesses have been examined till date, hence, there is no likelihood of the trial concluding in the near future.

7.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it

-3is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. August 17th, 2023 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No