High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/9399/2015dismissed

Daljit Singh v. State Of Punjab

2015-07-27Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj3 pages

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Misc. No.M-9399 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 27, 2015.

Daljit Singh ..........PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Punjab ........RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Karanjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

Mr. Rupam Aggarwal, D.A.G., Punjab.

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.

This is application seeking regular bail for petitioner Daljit Singh facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, in case bearing FIR No.171 dated 30.08.2014 registered at Police Station Kamboj, District Amritsar. First application seeking regular bail filed by petitioner bearing CRM No.M1556 of 2015 was got dismissed as withdrawn on 22.01.2015. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the prosecution has examined PW2 Sukhwinder Kaur, daughter of the deceased, who has not supported the prosecution version. Satnam Singh and Sucha Singh were also cited as prosecution witnesses but they have also given

-2affidavit (Annexures P-4 and P-5) denying the prosecution version. He has further argued that the deceased committed suicide due to the dispute regarding the property of his father namely Kirpal Singh, who had given his entire moveable and immovable property to his son Amrik Singh through Will.

Refuting the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel argues that out of 17 prosecution witnesses, 6 have been examined. Amrik Singh witness has supported the prosecution case. The entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. As per the allegations in FIR, the petitioner was having illicit relations with wife of deceased. Both killed him and then hanged him. It is evident that the petitioner is exercising influence over the prosecution witnesses and in case bail being allowed, he will prevail upon the other prosecution witnesses left to be examined by the prosecution.

The submission of the petitioner that deceased had committed suicide because of the Will of his father Kirpal Singh is to be examined by the trial Court as the Will pertains to the year 2010. Amrik Singh, material prosecution witness has supported the prosecution case. It has been submitted by learned State counsel that out of 17 prosecution witnesses, 6 have already been examined and next date fixed for evidence of prosecution is 06.08.2015 and the trial Court has expedited the trial of the case by giving short adjournments.

-3Keeping in view the above facts and that the release of petitioner on bail in this case may hamper the prosecution case as 2/3 witnesses of the prosecution have already been prevailed upon, the grant of regular bail to the petitioner, at this stage, is declined. Dismissed.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) July 27, 2015.

JUDGE Sachin M.