Mandeep Kaur @ Rosy v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No. 10973 of 2023 Date of Decision : 10.3.2023 Mandeep Kaur @ Rosy ..... Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

Present:

Mr. KBS Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Kunal Vinayak, AAG, Punjab --- TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA J. (ORAL):

This is a petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.233 dated 4.10.2022 under Sections 306, 498-A and 34 IPC registered at Police Station City Muktsar, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

The allegations in the FIR, recorded on the statement of the deceased's father are, that about three days back his daughter had gone to market with his wife. There they met his son-in-law (deceased's husband) who told them that she (deceased) had not brought sufficient dowry and it was better she end her life by consuming some poisonous substance or by hanging so that he could solemnize another marriage. Later, on 4.10.2022, the deceased hanged herself at her parental home while the complainant was away along with his wife.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is mother-in-law of the deceased, and even as per allegations in the FIR, she did not instigate the deceased in any manner, or abetted commission of suicide by her. The allegations of harassment and demand of dowry are vague and general ASHWANI KUMAR 2023.03.10 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No. 10973 of 2023 -2in nature. There is no specific entrustment or attribution to the petitioner. Investigation of the case is already over and trial is yet to commence. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Balwinder Singh, opposes the grant of bail on the ground that charges have already been framed on 9.3.2023 and the trial will soon commence. Material witnesses are still to be examined.

Taking into account submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, as also the fact that investigation of the case is already over and trial of the case will take a long time to conclude as none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, it is deemed appropriate to admit the petitioner to bail. No useful purpose will be served by confining him to custody during trial.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 10.3.2023 Ashwani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2023.03.10 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document