Ajinder Pal Singh v. State Of Punjab
! "!#$%&$'$$ $ $( $ ( )*+ ,
-$. /
$ 0%1 2 #!2
$ 2$%$ $
!
" # $$$ $ 2$%$ $/#3 $14 %
!&'() )*
!
+, -./ 0./&0/01 !&(.2 '03 4 !'&,
) 1.3/5, )6
!'/&27, )
! 8 8! ! )"" 9 0 % !
:!
0./&0/01 !"
4 "8 *;
9 4 !"
< ! ! !% " !"44 =/>4 !
! ! 4 ! ", "!
!"
!
"
1/// 4 ! :4 4*
4 44 "
!:
?
!
"
""2
4!" !
" "
"
"
4 4
! "22
44 " "4 !"4 "
* !
"
4 4 " !"
!
*
! ,
!
!&(.2 '03 4 !'&, )4 % !"/0/@0/01 !! 2"":
" !
4 !"
"
A! ! '/&27 , ) 4 <
! " !" "
4%4 /@/.0/0/
!
!""!
!&(.2 '03 '/&27, ) ' %
! he has been falsely implicated in this case. No demand of dowry was raised by him or his family
members from the victim or her family members and a false statement had been recorded by the victim in this regard. It is further argued by him that infact, the victim was a patient of severe depression and even much prior to her marriage with the petitioner which took place on 30.01.2021, she was taking treatment for depression from Mind Plus Health Care Pvt. Hospital, Ludhiana. He has placed on record Annexures P-4 and P-5 copies of patient admission detail as well as prescription slip showing that the victim was having treatment for depression. He has also placed on record Annexure P-6 copy of certificate issued dated 20.05.2021 by Mind Plus Hospital Pvt. Ltd. that the victim was under treatment for major depressive disorder from this hospital since 16.09.2016 till date.
It is submitted that the victim herself was hyper sensitive due to being a patient of depression and he had no hand in causing her suicidal death either by way of abetment or on account of any harassment by raising demand of dowry. He is in custody for a period of more than three and half year. Charge under Section 304-B of IPC was framed against him as on 01.09.2022. Not even a single witness has been examined by the prosecution so far. The trial is likely to take time. Therefore, it is urged that the petitioner deserves to be given concession of bail.
4.
Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that the victim had recorded her statement before a Magistrate levelling specific allegations as against the petitioner for harassing her on account of demand of car and had also stated that on the day of occurrence while leaving his house, the
petitioner had handed over a matchstick to her and told her to do whatever she wished to do with the same, meaning thereby that he instigated her to commit suicide. It is also argued that by handing over a matchstick to a person who as per the petitioner himself was suffering from depression and had suicidal tendencies amounted to instigating or compelling the person to commit suicide. It is further argued that the period of incarceration of the petitioner itself is not a ground to extend benefit of bail to him. There are serious and specific allegations against him. The case of co-accused who is the mother of the petitioner and has been extended benefit of pre-arrest bail, cannot be stated to be at parity with the case of the present petitioner. With these broad submissions, it is argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.
5.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record carefully. 3 % !" "
!
?7 ! "
!
!
"
4 4* !!* "
4 4
4 4!
!
4 4
2
4 !"
!
" 4 "
4 '//10/01 4 "
"
4- !"4!
!! : 2& 23 4 !"4 4 " "! 0/13;4
" !!
) ! !"!
B " * " !"4 " 4 "
! !!!
% "! !"
! !
4 !!*4
4 4 4 " 4 "
!"
!" !""! 4
!
! = + " ! !"
4 4
!!"
4
4 4
"
%
% !
! !!
"* 4
! 4
!!" !4 ""
4 ! !!" !!
"
!!
;! " . ,!
"
! :"! (
!"
" !
! 5$ 2$%$ $6 #!(
-$. /