Makhan Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-22243 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 16, 2016 Makhan Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Piyush Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Shivali, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.73 dated 14.06.2015 under Sections 302, 380, 323, 120-B IPC (offence under Section 307 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Mamdot, District Ferozepur. Notice of motion was issued and learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that FIR in the present case has been registered on the statement of Piara Singh. As per the allegations, the complainant has three sons from his first wife Akko namely Paramjeet Vineet Gulati 2016.09.27 12:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-22243 of 2016 -2Singh, Gurcharan Singh and Gurnam Singh. After death of his first wife, complainant re-married with Mahinder Kaur and one son namely Raju was born, who is now 15 years old. As per the FIR, there was dispute regarding agricultural land between the complainant and his sons. Further, as per the FIR, the complainant was given injuries outside the house by three persons with kappa and when he went inside the house, he saw his wife Mahinder Kaur lying dead. She has suffered two burn marks on her stomach, which shows that electric shock has been given to her. It is also in the FIR that iron trunks kept in the room were lying scattered. Learned State counsel stated that challan has already been presented against the petitioner and ear-rings of the deceased have also been recovered during the investigation.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the nature and gravity of the offence and without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not find it a fit case where petitioner is entitled to benefit of regular bail.

Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

August 16, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2016.09.27 12:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh