Satinder Singh @ Vipan v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 7.12.2015 Satinder Singh @ Vipan --Petitioner.

Vs.

State of Punjab --Respondent.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK Present : Mr. D.S. Pheruman, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Anmol Grewal, AAG, Punjab.

**** RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J. (ORAL) CRM-M-39268 of 2015 Applicant seeks permission to place on record Annexures P-9 and P-10.

Application is allowed, as prayed for.

CRM stands disposed of.

Criminal Misc. No. M- 36758 of 2015 Petitioner seeks bail pending trial in FIR No. 16 dated 2.3.2015 under Sections 302/201/404/120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Mehtiana, District Hoshiarpur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

has no connection with the offences alleged against him. He further submits that neither petitioner was related with the wife of deceased, nor he had any interest in the property of the deceased. There was no material on record to connect the petitioner with the crime in question. He places reliance on the statements Annexures P-9 and P-10. He concluded by submitting that, in fact, it was a case of natural death and the deceased was not murdered by anybody. He prays for allowing the present petition.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that petitioner is the main accused. She further submits that out of 18 PWs, 5 have been examined and one PW has been given up. Next date of hearing before the learned trial court is 8.12.2015. She concluded by submitting that since the allegations against the petitioner are direct and serious, he is not entitled for the concession of bail pending trial. She prays for dismissal of the present petition. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, after careful perusal of the record of the case and giving thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised, this Court is of the considered opinion that in the given fact situation of the present case, petitioner has not been found entitled for the concession of bail pending trial.

It is so said because allegations against the petitioner are serious. None of the statements relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner is of any help to the petitioner in any manner. Further, allegations are under Sections 302 as well as 201 IPC, besides other offences. Despite having been asked repeatedly, as to how the joint bank account of the petitioner with Smt.

Kaur, wife of the deceased is justified, he had no answer and righlty so, it being a matter of record. The circumstances strongly speak against the petitioner.

In view of the above and without commenting anything further on the merits of the case, lest it should prejudice the case of either of the parties, no case for bail pending trial has been made out.

Dismissed.

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 7.12.2015 AK Sharma