Jagtar Singh Alias Koka v. State Of Punjab
-1THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 11.07.2025 Jagtar Singh @ Koka ..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***
Present:
Mr. Vipul Joshi, Advocate and Mr. Piyush Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Simran Goria, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.
Mr. H. S. Randhawa, Advocate for the complainant.
*** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.
1.
Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.248, dated 04.08.2024, under Sections 103(1), 123, 238, 3(5) of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Sohana, District SAS Nagar, Mohali. Further prayer has been made that the petitioner be released from custody on interim bail till such time that the present petition is pending final adjudication.
2.
Succinctly the facts of the case are that on 04.08.2024, the police while on patrolling, received a secret information to the effect that Angrej Kaur wife of Gurdeep Singh had illicit relations with her brother-
-2in-law (Jeth), namely, Jagtar Singh, i.e. the petitioner. Angrej Kaur's daughter, namely, Preet Kaur (deceased), was of the age of about 13 years, when she came to know regarding their illicit relationship. Then, on 11.07.2024 at about 9.30 p.m., Angrej Kaur and Jagtar Singh in connivance with each other firstly administered poison to Preet Kaur (deceased) and thereafter murdered her by way of strangulation. Husband of Angrej Kaur, namely, Gurdeep Singh was doing job in the Army and before his arrival, on 12.07.2024, Angrej Kaur having connived with her brother-in-law (Jeth), Jagtar Singh performed the cremation of her deceased daughter, Preet Kaur in order to destroy the evidence. On finding the information reliable, FIR No.248, dated 04.08.
2024 under Sections 103(1), 123, 238, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 was registered and the investigation commenced. The petitioner was arrested on 05.08.2024. Apprehending arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, SAS Nagar, praying for the grant of bail. However after hearing both the sides, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, SAS Nagar, finding no merit in the same, dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner vide his order dated 27.11.2024. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition for the grant of anticipatory bail.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that the death of Preet Kaur had allegedly taken place due to snake bite in the night of 12.07.2024. He has submitted that the mother of
-3petitioner had submitted a representation dated 29.08.2024 to the Senior Superintendent of Police, SAS Nagar, Mohali stating that her son was illegally detained by the police. He has submitted that one another representation was filed by Kulwinder Singh, i.e. son of the petitioner, before the ADGP, Investigation Wing, Punjab Police on 24.10.2024. He has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the alleged statement of one Gurmeet Singh, who is allegedly stating therein that the petitioner had confessed before him of having committed the murder of Preet Kaur, however there is a long standing enmity between the petitioner's family and Gurmeet Singh. As a result, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on his statement, which cannot be relied upon.
He has submitted that the case of prosecution is totally based on the circumstantial evidence and there is no eye-witness in the present case. He has submitted that the extra judicial confession, as alleged before Gurmeet Singh, has no evidentiary value. He has submitted that except the statement of Gurmeet Singh, there is no other evidence with the prosecution to substantiate the frivolous allegations made against the petitioner. He has thus submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail. 4.
Affidavit dated 10.07.2025 of Rajinder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, State Crime Police Station, SAS Nagar on behalf of the respondent-State along with custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by the learned State Counsel today in the Court and the same is taken on record.
-45.
Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. She has drawn the attention of this Court to the affidavit filed by Rajinder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, State Crime Police Station, SAS Nagar. She has submitted that the deceased in the present case was a 13 year old child, who was daughter of co-accused, namely, Angrej Kaur. As per the case of prosecution, the petitioner was in illicit relationship with Angrej Kaur. As the deceased came to know about their illicit relations, both the petitioner and co-accused, in conspiracy with each other, eliminated the child. She has submitted that cremation of the child has been done without any postmortem in order to destroy the evidence.
She has submitted that father of the deceased-Gurdeep Singh, had earlier approached this Court by way of filing the petition bearing CRM-M No.7012 of 2025 seeking denovo/re-investigation in this case and thus, this Court vide order dated 21.04.2025 has transferred the investigation to the Bureau of Investigation, SSP, Mohali. She has submitted that the SIT has been constituted and the case is now under investigation with the SIT. She has submitted that the petitioner, besides the present FIR, is involved in 06 other FIRs and thus he is a habitual offender. She has thus submitted that keeping in view the gravity of the offences and the stage of the investigation, no case for the grant of bail to the petitioner is made out and the present petition deserves to be dismissed. 6.
Learned counsel for the complainant has also vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He
-5has submitted that the deceased in the present case was a 13 years old child. He has submitted that the petitioner in conspiracy with the mother of deceased has eliminated the child in a well hatched conspiracy. He has also prayed for dismissal of the bail petition. 7.
The Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 8.
It is deciphered that the deceased in the present case was a 13 years old child. The petitioner was alleged to have illicit relations with the mother of deceased. As the deceased came to know about their relationship, hence in conspiracy with each other, both of them allegedly killed the child. The cremation of the child was done without any postmortem.
9.
Needless to say that this Court vide order dated 21.04.2025 had transferred the investigation to the Bureau of Investigation on the petition filed by the father of the deceased. As submitted before this Court, the SIT has been constituted and the case is under investigation. 10.
Keeping in view the gravity of the offence and in the attending facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for the grant of bail. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 11.07.2025 JUDGE rittu Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No