Neha v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision: 4.9.2024 Neha ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Sandeep S. Majithia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Prabhdeep Singh Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.

***** FIR No.

Dated Police Station Section/s 1.3.2024 Goindwal Sahib, District Tarn Taran 302, 379-B(2), 382, 506, 34, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 25/27 of Arms Act.

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in respect of the aforementioned FIR.

2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Sukhwinder Kaur, wherein it is alleged that on 1.3.2024 when she along with her son Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi and his friend Jagjit Singh @ Jagga son of Sulakhan Singh were proceeding in their car to attend hearing of the case at Courts, then 3 unknown persons came in a car from behind, who were carrying pistols and fired indiscriminately at Gurpreet Singh leading to his death. It is further the case of prosecution that

( 2 ) on 16.3.2024, the aforesaid Jagjit Singh @ Jagga son of Sulakhan Singh got his statement recorded stating that car in which assailants had come was being driven by Arshdeep Singh. Upon arrest of Arshdeep Singh, he suffered a disclosure statement to the effect that Bikramjit Singh @ Vicky, Deepu and Ashu were accompanying him. He further stated that he used to keep weapons in the house of his sister Neha.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is nowhere named in the FIR and nor admittedly was amongst the assailants and has been nominated as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement made by one of the co-accused to the effect that the weapons and car used in commission of crime were kept in the house of the petitioner - Neha. It has been submitted that the petitioner is a lady aged about 21 years and has a clean record and since as on now, she has been behind bars for the last more than 5 months, she deserves the concession of bail.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel submitted that since the coaccused Arshdeep Singh has made a disclosure statement against the petitioner, her complicity is clearly evident. Learned State counsel has, however, not disputed the fact that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last more than 5 months and has a clean record. 5.

This Court has considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 6.

Admittedly, the petitioner was not amongst the assailants, who had fired at the deceased and nor was present at the spot. The petitioner has been nominated subsequently on the basis of a disclosure statement made by co-

( 3 ) accused by levelling allegations to the effect that the weapons and the car used in commission of crime were kept in her house. The admissibility and veracity of such like disclosure statement would be debatable particularly when there is no other evidence to show her complicity. The petitioner is a young lady and has a clean record. The trial is yet to commence and as many as 28 PWs have been cited. Under these circumstances, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose as conclusion of trial is likely to consume time.

7.

The instant petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on her furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

4.9.2024 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) Geeta/P Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No