Sukhjinder Kaur @ Bevi v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-20419-2021 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No. 20419 of 2021 Date of decision: 21.5.2021 Sukhjinder Kaur @ Bevi

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Joginder Pal Devgan, Advocate for the petitioner.

HARNARESH SINGH GILL , J.

(ORAL) Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing. Through this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 75 dated 8.8.2018 under Sections 323, 324, 326, 201 (added later on), 148 and 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Rangar Nangal, Police District Batala.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that no offence under Section 326 IPC is made out against the petitioner and even as per the FIR, it is the complainant, who has come to the village/house of the petitioner. He further submits that there is a delay of three days in lodging the present FIR. Learned counsel also submits that as per the photographs (Annexure P-3), the complainant who is the Ex-Sarpanch, is holding a weapon. He further submits that Manjit Singh, husband of the petitioner, has been granted regular bail by the Sessions Court. Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Avtar Singh Sandhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the State and submits that the GURPREET SINGH 2021.05.21 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chadigarh

CRM-M-20419-2021 -2petitioner was empty handed and has given fist blows on the face and nose of the complainant.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. In the present case, the FIR in question was registered on 8.8.2018 and the petitioner was attributed only fist blows on the face and nose of the complainant. Moreover, Manjit Singh, husband of the petitioner has been granted regular bail by the Sessions Court. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds merit in this petition and the same is allowed. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and if she is sought to be arrested, she shall be released on anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions as envisaged in Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

It is made clear that if pursuant to and in compliance with this order, the petitioner does not cooperate with the investigating agency, the investigating agency would be liberty to move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail.

(HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE May 21, 2021 Gurpreet Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No GURPREET SINGH 2021.05.21 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chadigarh