Sehdev Verma v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.16261 of 2024

Reserved on: 04.09.2024

Date of Decision: 10.09.2024 Sehdev Verma .....Petitioner.

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA ***** Argued by:- Mr. Gulzar Mohammed, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.

By filing this petition, the petitioner has sought the relief of regular bail in the criminal case arisen out of the FIR bearing No.0027 dated 13.03.2023 registered at Police Station Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar, under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC, wherein the offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC are stated to have been added later-on. 2.

Shorn and short of unnecessary details, the allegations, as levelled by complainant-Mohan Singh Tomar in the subject FIR, are that his daughter Laxmi (since deceased and here-in-after to be referred as the 'victim') had married Rahul Verma, the son of the petitioner and had been residing at her matrimonial home. However, her (victim's) husband and the

CRM-M No.16261 of 2024 -2petitioner used to harass, abuse and give beatings to her, so as to pressurise her to bring money from her parents and on account of being fed up with her constant maltreatment and harassment at the hands of both the abovesaid accused persons, she had ended her life. 3.

Status-Report has already been filed on behalf of the respondent-State, by way of the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, West, Jalandhar.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel in the present petition and have also gone through the file carefully.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been behind the bars since 25.10.2023 and the Challan has been presented and the Charges have already been framed and some of the prosecution witnesses have also been examined by the trial Court and moreover, the petitioner is neither involved nor has been convicted in any other criminal case and in these circumstances, he deserves the relief, as prayed for in the instant petition.

6.

Learned State counsel has not disputed the afore-discussed factual position but she has opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of the relief of regular bail.

7.

Keeping in view the above-mentioned facts and circumstances and also the fact that the trial of the case is likely to take sufficient time to conclude and without commenting or expressing any opinion on the merits of the criminal case under reference, the petition in hand is, hereby,

CRM-M No.16261 of 2024 -3allowed and the petitioner named Sehdev Verma is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing the requisite personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned.

(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) September 10th, 2024 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable:

No