Allowed

Jagat Singh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Jul 2011CRM-M/12323/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an accused in an IPC 304-B case for dowry-related death, sought bail. The High Court allowed bail pending trial, noting the general allegations and lack of specific harassment history despite prosecution evidence of dowry demands by relator family members.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Gurgaon.

Jagat Singh Vs State of Haryana — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Criminal Misc. No. M-12323 of 2011 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Criminal Misc. No. M-12323 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.7.2011

Jagat Singh

.. Petitioner

State of Haryana

.. Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

¶10

Present: Mr. Navneet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Subhash Godara, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

¶12

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶13

The petitioner is an accused in FIR No. 57 dated 16.3.2010, registered under Sections 304-B/34 IPC, Police Station, Pataudi. The allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner along with his parents had killed his wife by putting kerosene on her. The petitioner is in custody since 22.5.2010.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no history of harassment indicated in the FIR and especially prior to the death of the wife of the petitioner on the basis of which offence under Section 304-B IPC could be attracted. The allegations in the FIR are quite general. Father of the petitioner has been released on regular bail, whereas mother was granted anticipatory bail.

¶15

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that subsequent to the registration of FIR, statements of brother and another uncle of the deceased were recorded under Section 175 Cr.P.C., wherein they stated that ever since the marriage of the parties took place, the deceased was being harassed for dowry and a few days back, the petitioner had come to their residence and ` 1,00,000/- were given to him. No specific instance of harassment has been referred to. Father of the deceased

¶16

Criminal Misc. No. M-12323 of 2011 [2]

¶17

is serving in BSF. However, the fact remains that the complaint on the basis of which the FIR has been registered was lodged by one of the uncles of the deceased. It is stated that though the brothers are living separate but in the adjoining houses. There are no allegations in the FIR regarding giving of money to the petitioner. The father of the deceased has not yet come in picture. Out of 20 prosecution witnesses, statements of only three witnesses have been recorded.

¶18

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the allegations in the FIR and other material, as pointed out at the time of hearing, in my opinion, the petitioner deserves the concession of bail pending trial. Let the petitioner be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Gurgaon.

¶19

The petition stands disposed of.

¶20

(Rajesh Bindal) Judge

¶21

25.7.2011 mk

Jagat Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagat Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satnam Singh Vs State of Haryana

Nachattar Singh Vs State of Punjab

Salamat Alias Bitta Masih Vs State of Punjab

Nachattar Singh Vs State of Punjab

Narain Singh Vs State of Haryana

Jaswant Singh Vs State of Punjab