Amandeep Kaur v. State Of Punjab

::1::

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 31.10.2022 Amandeep Kaur .... Petitioner V/s State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. R.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Jiteshwar Singh, AAG, Punjab.

***** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The prayer in the present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0067 dated 16.06.2022 under Sections 327, 347, 365, 387, 34, 120-B IPC and Sections 323 and 328 IPC (added later on) registered at Police Station Satnampura, District Kapurthala.

2.

The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of Radhika Prasad Tripathi, who stated that he was the age of 72 years and worked as a Palmist. On 13.06.2022, Amandeep Kaur (petitioner), wife of Baldev Singh and Ramandeep Sharma (since granted bail vide order dated 10.10.2022 in CRM-M-38858-2022) wife of Vipan Sharma came to meet him and stated that they had to perform a religious function at home in order to remove a bad omen. On this pretext, he was brought to their home where they also called Chander Bhan son of Jiwan Lal. They forcibly removed his

::2::

clothes and both the ladies also removed their clothes and Chander Bhan made his video alongwith the two ladies. He was also given beatings and two gold rings worn by him alongwith two silver rings were taken away. A watch was also taken away by them and a demand of Rs. 30 lacs as ransom was sought. Thereafter, he was dropped at Aahadiyabad Chowk. These three persons were repeatedly calling Rajiv Sharma (since granted bail vide order dated 10.10.2022 passed by this Court in CRM-M-33109-2022) on phone and were acting on his dictates. Thereafter, he had also gone to the house of Ramandeep Sharma alongwith Rs.50,000/- where the three persons asked him to bring the remaining money, pursuant to which, he lodged the instant complaint.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner-Amandeep Kaur contends that the allegations in the FIR are completely baseless. No recovery of a nude video was effected from any of the accused. The petitioner is in custody since 16.06.2022 and is a first-time offender. The investigation is complete and a number of prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. The co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Rajiv Sharma and Ramandeep Sharma @ Ramanjit Sharma have been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 10.10.2022 passed in CRM-M-Nos. 33109 and 38858 of 2022 respectively. He, thus, contends that the petitioner be granted the concession of bail.

4.

The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contends that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail looking at the seriousness of the allegation. He, however, does not deny the period of custody undergone by the petitioner as also the stage of the Trial and the fact that the co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Rajiv Sharma and Ramandeep Sharma @ Ramanjit Sharma have been granted the concession of bail vide

::3::

order dated 10.10.2022 passed by this Court in CRM-M-Nos. 33109 and 38858 of 2022 respectively .

5.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. 6.

Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 16.06.2022. The challan was submitted on 08.08.2022 and none of the 11 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. The co-accused of the petitioner have been granted the concession of bail. Besides, the petitioner is a first-time offender and no other FIR stands registered against her. Therefore, her further incarceration is not required.

8.

Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner, namely, Amandeep Kaur is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

( JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE October 31, 2022 sukhpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No