Manju v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-58323 of 2024 petitioner had been staying in a separate house from the year 2019 and even though the deceased had jumped into the Canal but there is no linked evidence with regard to the present petitioner and only vague allegations have been made in the FIR pertaining to occurrence of a quarrel with the present petitioner, on the date preceding the occurrence although she was residing in a separate accommodation. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that be that as it may, the investigation has already been completed by the police and challan has been presented, although charges have not yet been framed. The petitioner being a lady of 62 years and having faced incarceration for 6 months, may be considered for grant of regular bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that so far as the custody of the petitioner is concerned, it is correct that she has faced incarceration for 6 months and investigation has been completed and thereafter challan has been presented. The petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail because the allegations against the petitioner were serious because her daughterin-law had jumped into a Canal after having a quarrel just one day before the occurrence had taken place.

5.

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 6.

It is a case where the petitioner is a lady of the age of 62 years has faced incarceration for about 6 months and as per both the learned counsel for the parties, investigation has already been

CRM-M-58323 of 2024 completed and challan has been presented. As per the FIR the allegations against the petitioner were that she had a quarrel with her daughter-in-law who after one day of the quarrel has committed suicide by jumping into a Canal. The allegations have been levelled against both the husband and the mother-in-law of the deceased but as per learned counsel for the petitioner, she was living separately from her son from the year 2019.

7.

Be that as it may, it is a case where the petitioner is a lady of 62 years and investigation of the case has been completed. It is not a case of the State counsel that in case petitioner is released on bail, then she may abscond from justice and may tamper with the evidence, therefore considering the aforesaid facts that the investigation of the case is complete and petitioner is a lady of the age of 62 years, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case.

8.

However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on merits of the case and is only meant for the purpose of decision of present petition. February 19, 2025 ( JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) archana JUDGE