Sandeep Kaur v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 08.11.2024 Sandeep Kaur ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent CRM-M-17814-2024 (O&M) Gurpreet Singh @ Kamaljeet Singh @ Karmjeet Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent CRM-M-14430-2024 (O&M) Kulveer Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Jaskamal Singh Grewal, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-10592-2024.

Mr. Rahul Garg, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-14430-2024.

Mr. B. S. Jatana, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-17814-2024.

Mr. Neeraj Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. J. K. Singla, Advocate and Ms. Suman Rani, Advocate for the complainant.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)
 



  

      

 

  

! "

  #$ % 1.

This order shall dispose of three petitions filed on behalf of the petitioner(s) seeking grant of regular bail in respect of aforementioned FIR. 2.

The allegations against the petitioner in all the three petitions are that Baljinder Singh committed suicide on account of the fact that his wife Sandeep Kaur was having illicit relations with Kulveer Singh @ Gukku and Gurpreet Singh.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that they have been falsely been implicated in the present case and that in any case, even if all the allegations as levelled in the FIR are taken to be correct the same cannot be said to constitute any offence under Section 306 IPC inasmuch as the petitioners cannot be said to have abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. It has further been submitted that as on date the petitioner(s) in all the cases have been behind bars for the last more than 6 months and the trial has not been commenced till date, they deserve the concession of bail.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the complainant submitted that the petitioner (s) are specifically named in the FIR and a specific role has been attributed to them, their complicity cannot be doubted. It has however, been informed that all the petitioners as on date have been behind bars since the last more than 6 months and that the challan has already

been presented and that charges are yet to be framed. It has been informed that as many as 17 PWs have been cited.

5.

This Court has considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 6.

Without commenting anything as regards veracity of the allegations levelled against the petitioners, but having regard to the fact that all of them have been behind bars for a substantial period of more than 6 months and the investigation already stands concluded and challan has been filed and the trial has virtually not even commenced, further detention of the petitioners would not be justified. All the three petitions, as such, are accepted and petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/DutyMagistrate concerned.

7.

A photocopy of this order be placed on files of other connected cases. 08.11.2024 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) archana JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No