High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/21759/2020allowed

Virender Kaur v. State Of Haryana

2020-08-11Mr. Justice Hari Pal Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-21759 of 2020 Date of Decision: 11.08.2020 Virender Kaur

...Petitioner (s)

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA Present:- Mr. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana ***** HARI PAL VERMA, J. (Oral) The matter has been taken up for hearing through video conferencing due to outbreak of COVID-19.

Petitioner, who is mother-in-law of Harpreet Kaur (complainant/deceased in the present FIR), has filed the present petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.23 dated 05.01.2019 under Sections 409A/304-B/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station City Narnaul, District Narnaul. The earlier petition filed by the petitioner i.e. CRM-M-240572019 Virender Kaur Vs. State of Haryana was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 03.07.2019.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the deceased got married with the son of the petitioner on 27.10.2013 and she died after consuming Sulphas tablets at her parents' house. The prosecution witnesses have been examined in the case on 06.11.2019 and thereafter, ASHWANI KUMAR 2020.08.11 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Criminal Misc. No.M-21759 of 2020 -2statement of the accused was recorded on 15.11.2019 and the list of defence witnesses was ordered to be furnished within three days and consequently, two defence witnesses were examined on 05.12.2019. However, due to Covid-19, the trial could not be concluded and the petitioner is in custody since 18.01.2019. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that except bald allegations due to the fact that the petitioner is mother-in-law of the deceased, there is no specific allegation against her.

Learned State counsel submits that the deceased has died within 7 years of her marriage and there are specific allegations that the petitioner used to harass the deceased for bringing insufficient dowry. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled for bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 18.01.2019 and all prosecution witnesses have been examined in the case. Considering the fact that the petitioner is an old lady and due to Covid-19, the trial in the case is not going to be concluded in near future, this Court deems it appropriate to release the petitioner on regular bail. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted on regular bail, subject to furnishing of his bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. August 11, 2020 ( HARI PAL VERMA ) AK JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No ASHWANI KUMAR 2020.08.11 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document