Ram Pyari v. State Of Haryana

CRM No.M-18999 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-18999 of 2017 Decided on: 30.05.2017 Ram Pyari ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL Present :

Mr. R.S. Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Dimple Jain, AAG, Haryana.

REKHA MITTAL, J. (Oral) The petitioner prays for grant of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') in FIR No.276 dated 12.07.2016, for offence punishable under Sections 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') registered in Police Station Ganaur, District Sonepat. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 27.07.2016. On completion of investigation, challan has been presented in the Court and trial is pending. It is further submitted that only 03 out of 15 witnesses of the prosecution have been examined. The material witness namely the complainant has already been examined in the case.

It is further submitted that in the FIR, there is no specific allegation either with regard to demand of money or the manner in which the deceased was being harassed who committed suicide by hanging after 06 years and 05 months of the marriage. It is further submitted that the deceased left behind two children and the younger child aged about 21⁄2 years is residing at the house of husband Mohd. Yakub 2017.05.

CRM No.M-18999 of 2017 of the deceased.

Counsel for the State has not disputed the factual assertions but opposed the prayer for bail.

I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the paperbook and the police records.

Concededly, the prosecution till date has examined only 03 out of 15 witnesses cited in the case. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner either with regard to demand of dowry or harassment to the deceased in connection thereof. Conclusion of the trial is likely to take its own time. The law is more liberal with regard to grant of bail to a woman. There is no allegation against the petitioner that she is likely to flee from the process of justice in case enlarged on bail.

Without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the controversy, bail to the petitioner subject to satisfaction of the trial Court. However, she shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) She shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (ii) She shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

30.05.2017 (REKHA MITTAL) yakub JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Mohd. Yakub 2017.05.31 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh