Chander Bhan vs State Of Haryana on 20 December, 2017

CRM No.M-40440 of 2017
-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M- 40440 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: December 20 , 2017.

Chander Bhan …… PETITIONER (s)
Versus
State of Haryana …… RESPONDENT (s)

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Sanjay K.Saini, AAG, Haryana.
*****
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?
*****

LISA GILL, J.

The petitioner prays for bail pending trial in FIR No.220 dated

07.10.2016 under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC, Police Station Badhra, District

Bhiwani.

It is submitted that petitioner is the real brother of the father-in-law

of the deceased and the paternal uncle (Taya) of the husband of the deceased.

The sister of the deceased is married to the son of the present petitioner. There

was no question of any demand of dowry etc. by the present petitioner. The

petitioner, it is submitted, is sought to be inculpated only because of his

1 of 3
24-12-2017 08:40:29 :::
CRM No.M-40440 of 2017
-2-

relationship with the husband of the deceased. Moreover, the complainant

(PW2) as well as the mother (PW3) and real sister (PW1) of the deceased have

not supported the prosecution version. Copies of their statements are attached

with this petition as Annexures P3 to P5. Learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner’s first application for bail was dismissed as withdrawn

on 28.07.2017 (Annexure P7). The present petition has been filed after the

abovesaid material witnesses have deposed before the learned trial court. It is

contended that there is no other evidence on record to show the complicity of the

present petitioner in this case. He has been in custody since 23.10.2016. It is

thus prayed that this petition be allowed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Satish

Kumar, is unable to deny that the complainant as well as the mother and the real

sister of the deceased have not supported the prosecution case while deposing

before the learned trial court. Needless to say, consideration of the effect or

otherwise thereof is in the domain of the learned trial court after consideration of

the entire evidence on record.

However, the petitioner, who is in custody since 23.10.2016, is not

reported to be involved in any other case. Trial in this case is not likely to

conclude in the near future. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the

petitioner incarcerated any longer in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this

case.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioner is

likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true

2 of 3
24-12-2017 08:40:30 :::
CRM No.M-40440 of 2017
-3-

facts before the Court, if released on bail.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but without

commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits thereof, this petition

filed by Chander Bhan is allowed. The petitioner be released on bail pending

trial subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of

the learned Trial Court.

It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall

be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely

confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition.

( LISA GILL )
December 20 , 2017. JUDGE
‘om’

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No

3 of 3
24-12-2017 08:40:30 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *