Lakhveer Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.37251 of 2021 Date of Decision:21.09.2021 LAKHVEER SINGH ......Petitioner Vs STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present:Mr.J.S Bhandohal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Bhupender Beniwal, DAG, Punjab.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral) Petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C in case bearing FIR No.161 dated 29.07.2021, registered under Section 306 IPC, at Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur.

The FIR was registered at the instance of Shinder Kaur wife of Gurcharan Singh @ Charna with the allegations that her younger daughter Sandeep Kaur was married to Jagpreet Singh about four months ago. Petitioner used to trouble her daughter for long. Petitioner and his father Karnail Singh, Lali Kaur i.e. sister of Lakhvir Singh, brother in-law of Pali Singh and brother in-law Nikrha Singh wanted that the complainant party should marry Sandeep Kaur to the petitioner. The accused party wanted to break the marriage of Sandeep Kaur so that marriage

of Sandeep Kaur could be performed with Lakhvir Singh. Sandeep Kaur came from the house of her in-laws and started living with the complainant where the petitioner etc. used to come again and again due to the aforesaid reasons, the husband of the complainant became upset. On 28.07.2021 at about 6/7 PM Lakhvir Singh, Nikrha Singh, Pali Singh, Lali Kaur and Karnail Singh came to the house of the complainant and stated that they have got broken the marriage of Sandeep Kaur with Jagpreet Singh and now they want that Sandeep Kaur be married to Lakhvir Singh. Gurcharan Singh became upset to the highest degree as he was defamed in the brotherhood. The accused party went back by talking loudly and that prompted the deceased to consume some poisonous substance on 29.07.2021 and his health started deteriorating and he ultimately died in the hospital.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the ingredients of offence under Section 306 IPC are not attracted. Learned State counsel, further opposed the bail on the ground that conduct of the petitioner is such which besides being immoral is against social fabric. The act was intended to disturb the social fabric and the deceased being a respectable person of the society felt humiliated in the eyes of relatives and friends and also on seeing the future of his daughter he committed suicide and that may be the natural instinct of human being.

At this stage, without embarking upon the merits of the case, I find that no indulgence can be granted to the petitioner as the petitioner himself started proposing to the complainant party that he would marry the married daughter of the complainant by getting her divorced from her husband. Such an act of the petitioner cannot be translated to mean that there is

no instigation or abetment to commit suicide by the deceased. Dismissed.

(RAJ MOHAN SINGH) 21.09.2021 JUDGE Amandeep Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No