Ravinder Singh And Others v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-49278-2021 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-49278-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.02.2022 Ravinder Singh @ Raju and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. K.S. Maangat, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. M.S. Dullat, Addl. AG, Punjab.

(proceedings conducted through video conferencing) GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered against them vide FIR No.99 dated 22.09.2020 at Police Station Mattewal, district Amritsar, under Sections 306/34 IPC.

2.

At the time of issuance of notice of motion dated 25.11.2021, the following order was passed:

"Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the instant FIR was lodged at the instance of Jaswinder Kaur wherein it is alleged that her brother Satnam Singh was married to Simranjit Kaur and that her brother's wife Simranjit Kaur however, used to quarrel with her husband Satnam Singh (deceased) and used to maltreat him. It is alleged that on 21.9.2020 a quarrel had taken place between complainant's brother Satnam Singh and his wife Simranjit Kaur, upon which Simranjit Kaur called her parents and brothers. Gorkha, Raju and Shankar brothers of Simranjit Kaur came there and had an altercation with deceased Satnam Singh and scuffled with him. Later VANDANA YADAV 2022.02.08 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-49278-2021 (O&M) Satnam Singh being fed up on account of the conduct of the accused committed suicide.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that it is a case where the deceased was under some kind of depression and had suicidal tendencies and that the mere fact that there was some quarrel with his in-laws cannot be construed to mean that the in-laws had abetted commission of his suicide. Learned counsel has further submitted that coaccused Gorkha had already been granted anticipatory bail and that in these circumstances the petitioners also deserve the same concession on the grounds of parity. Notice of motion for 7.2.2022.

xxx xxx xxx"

3.

Learned State counsel upon instructions has informed that pursuant to interim directions issued by this Court, the petitioners have since joined investigation and are not required for any custodial interrogation and are not wanted in any other case. 4.

In view of the aforestated position, the petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2021 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioners shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

07.02.2022 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) VY JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No VANDANA YADAV 2022.02.08 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document