Jeeto @ Surjit Kaur And ORS v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M- 1654 of 2018(O&M) Date of Decision: March 01 , 2018.

Jeeto @ Surjit Kaur and others ...... PETITIONER (s)

Versus

State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present:

Mr. Bhajan Singh Sodhi, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab.

*****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? ***** LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No.0039 dated 21.05.2017 under Section 306 IPC, registered at Police Station Mukandpur, District SBS Nagar. It is submitted that no offence punishable under Section 306 IPC is made out against the petitioners. As per allegations in the FIR, the complainant was telephonically asked by his wife (the deceased) to come back home as their neighbours and some persons of village Bairisiyan had come to beat her. When the complainant came back home, he saw that people were gathered outside his house. His wife had set herself on fire. She was brought to Civil Hospital,

-2Banga thereafter, referred to Civil Hospital, Jalandhar. Statement of the complainant's wife was recorded to the effect that ten people had beaten her with pipes and caused injuries on her head and face. They locked her in a room and they told her to commit suicide. She poured petrol on herself and set herself on fire. The complainant's wife named as many as ten persons including the present petitioners. She further stated that apart from the said ten persons, certain unknown persons were also present.

Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently argues that the petitioners, who are old women, two of them over 60 years of age, have nothing to do with the controversy in hand. There is no history of any earlier quarrel or altercation between the parties, who are otherwise related to each other. It is submitted that the complainant party realised that the said FIR has been registered due to certain misunderstandings within the family as number of other persons belonging to the family had been named randomly in the present FIR. There is nothing on record record to indicate how the petrol which the complainant's wife poured on herself was available in the locked room.

Moreover the petitioners, it is submitted, have joined investigation and they undertake to face the proceedings and not misuse the concession of anticipatory bail, if afforded to them. Therefore, it is prayed that this petition be allowed. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Sukhpal, verifies that the petitioners have joined investigation and are not involved in any other criminal case. Their custodial interrogation is not required. It is confirmed that there is no evidence of any earlier altercation etc. between the parties.

-3There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts before the Court, if released on bail. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above but without commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed. Consequently, order dated 24.01.2018 is made absolute. It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition. ( LISA GILL ) March 01 , 2018.

JUDGE 'om'

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No