Present: Ms.Gursharan K.Mann Advocate Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1154394
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJul-07-2014
AppellantPresent: Ms.Gursharan K.Mann Advocate
RespondentState of Punjab
Excerpt:
crm no.m-4075 of 2014 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh224crm no.m-4075 of 2014 date of decision:07.07.2014 harjit kaur .....petitioner versus state of punjab .....respondent coram: hon'ble mr. justice mehinder singh sullar. present: ms.gursharan k.mann, advocate, for the petitioner. mr.raj preet singh sidhu, assistant advocate general, punjab, for the respondent-state. mr.pbs goraya, advocate, for the complainant. **** mehinder singh sullar , j.(oral) petitioner-harjit kaur, daughter of dayal singh (young student), has directed the instant petition for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against her along with her other co-accused, vide fir no.177 dated 05.07.2013, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 341, 148 and 149 ipc, by the police of police station chherretta, district amritsar city.2. notice of the petition was issued to the state.3. after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail deserves to be accepted in this context.4. the pith and substance of the prosecution version is that, the rani seema 2014.07.08 10:41 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh crm no.m-4075 of 2014 2 petitioner was engaged with gurpreet singh. on 26.06.2013 at about 8.30 pm, gurpreet singh, brother of complainant-baljeet singh, had gone to liberty market, amritsar. he did not return home. the complainant searched for him, but in vain. on 28.06.2013, his dead body was recovered in naked condition from some deserted house. subsequently, it was claimed that the petitioner and his other co-accused committed the murder of gurpreet singh. it is not a matter of dispute that initially, the present case was registered against the petitioner along with her other co- accused, namely, danish, harvinder kaur babbal and manmahak singh etc. since, the police could not collect any evidence against them, so, they were exonerated and final police report(challan) was submitted only against the petitioner. on instructions from hc ravinder singh, the investigating officer, learned state counsel has fairly acknowledged that there is no direct evidence available on record against the petitioner in this case. the prosecution has pressed into service only the circumstantial evidence in the shape of last seen evidence by nirmal singh, extra-judicial confession before pw jasbir singh and recovery of 'daggar' and blood-stained clothes from the accused, in pursuance of her disclosure statement.5. undisputedly, nirmal singh and jasbir singh are related to deceased-gurpreet singh. not only that, nirmal singh has initially made his statement(annexure p-3) on 05.07.2013, wherein he has not uttered a single word about the last seen of the deceased with the petitioner. he was stated to have subsequently improved his version in his supplementary statement dated 16.07.2013 in this regard. what is the rani seema 2014.07.08 10:41 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh crm no.m-4075 of 2014 3 evidentiary value, acceptability and admissibility of such circumstantial evidence of last seen, extra-judicial confession and the indicated recovery, inter alia, would be a moot point to be decided during the course of trial by the trial court.6. be that as it may, the petitioner is a young girl and she was a brilliant student of m.sc. in swami satyanand college of management & technology(annexure p-5). she was arrested on 13.07.2013. since then she is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain her in jail. there is no history of her previous involvement in any other criminal case. the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.7. in the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial, the instant petition for regular bail is hereby accepted. the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court. needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits in the trial of the case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for regular bail. july 07, 2014 (mehinder singh sullar) seema judge rani seema 2014.07.08 10:41 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh
Judgment:

CRM No.M-4075 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH224CRM No.M-4075 of 2014 Date of Decision:07.07.2014 Harjit Kaur .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Ms.Gursharan K.Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Raj Preet Singh Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State. Mr.PBS Goraya, Advocate, for the complainant. **** MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral) Petitioner-Harjit Kaur, daughter of Dayal Singh (young student), has directed the instant petition for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against her along with her other co-accused, vide FIR No.177 dated 05.07.2013, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 341, 148 and 149 IPC, by the police of Police Station Chherretta, District Amritsar City.

2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

4. The pith and substance of the prosecution version is that, the Rani Seema 2014.07.08 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM No.M-4075 of 2014 2 petitioner was engaged with Gurpreet Singh. On 26.06.2013 at about 8.30 PM, Gurpreet Singh, brother of complainant-Baljeet Singh, had gone to Liberty Market, Amritsar. He did not return home. The complainant searched for him, but in vain. On 28.06.2013, his dead body was recovered in naked condition from some deserted house. Subsequently, it was claimed that the petitioner and his other co-accused committed the murder of Gurpreet Singh. It is not a matter of dispute that initially, the present case was registered against the petitioner along with her other co- accused, namely, Danish, Harvinder Kaur Babbal and Manmahak Singh etc. Since, the police could not collect any evidence against them, so, they were exonerated and final police report(challan) was submitted only against the petitioner. On instructions from HC Ravinder Singh, the investigating officer, learned State Counsel has fairly acknowledged that there is no direct evidence available on record against the petitioner in this case. The prosecution has pressed into service only the circumstantial evidence in the shape of last seen evidence by Nirmal Singh, extra-judicial confession before PW Jasbir Singh and recovery of 'daggar' and blood-stained clothes from the accused, in pursuance of her disclosure statement.

5. Undisputedly, Nirmal Singh and Jasbir Singh are related to deceased-Gurpreet Singh. Not only that, Nirmal Singh has initially made his statement(Annexure P-3) on 05.07.2013, wherein he has not uttered a single word about the last seen of the deceased with the petitioner. He was stated to have subsequently improved his version in his supplementary statement dated 16.07.2013 in this regard. What is the Rani Seema 2014.07.08 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM No.M-4075 of 2014 3 evidentiary value, acceptability and admissibility of such circumstantial evidence of last seen, extra-judicial confession and the indicated recovery, inter alia, would be a moot point to be decided during the course of trial by the trial Court.

6. Be that as it may, the petitioner is a young girl and she was a brilliant student of M.Sc. in Swami Satyanand College of Management & Technology(Annexure P-5). She was arrested on 13.07.2013. Since then she is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain her in jail. There is no history of her previous involvement in any other criminal case. The conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.

7. In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial, the instant petition for regular bail is hereby accepted. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits in the trial of the case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for regular bail. July 07, 2014 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) seema JUDGE Rani Seema 2014.07.08 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh