Allowed

Harjinder Kaur v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Sept 2011CRM-M/29774/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants regular bail to the petitioner in a murder case. The High Court held that keeping the petitioner in custody serves no useful purpose as material evidence has already been produced, and granted her release upon furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Released on furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Criminal Misc. No. M-29774 of 2010 Date of decision: 20^th September, 2011

¶3

Harjinder Kaur

¶4

.........Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Punjab

¶7

..........Respondent

¶8

Before: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI

¶9

Present: Mr. Jagmohan Ghumman, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Anurag Arora, Advocate for the complainant.

¶11

Mr. K.S.Sidhu, DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

¶12

M.M.S.BEDI,J.(Oral)

¶13

The petitioner seeks concession of regular bail in a case which was originally registered at the instance of her sister Sarbjit Kaur wife of Harbans Singh, alleging that on 11.12.2009, her husband had left house on his bicycle to irrigate his wheat crops but he didn't return, subsequently, his dead body was found lying near the tube-well of Niranjan Singh.

¶14

During the course of the investigation, the investigating agency involved the informant Sarbjit Kaur. Statement of one Ram Singh recorded on 19.12.2009 to the effect that Gurpreet Singh had made an extra judicial confession before him that he had illicit

¶15

¶16

Criminal Misc. No. M-29774 of 2010

¶17

relations with Sarabjit Kaur wife of Harbans Singh and he along with Sarbjit Kaur had committed the murder of Harbans Singh by hitting his head with weight lifting rod.

¶18

So far as the petitioner is concerned the only allegation against her that she was aware of the affairs of the Sarbjit Kaur, her real sister with Gurpreet Singh.

¶19

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been involved mere on the misguided suspicion and that there is no evidence against her of having participated in the crime as alleged by the prosecution agency.

¶20

Learned counsel for the complainant has intervened to contend that Gurpreet Singh co-accused had illicit relations with both sisters namely Sarbjit Kaur and Harjeet Kaur, petitioner.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State counsel and complainant and gone through the record.

¶22

Allegation against the petitioner is that she, in connivance with her co-accused Gurpreet Singh and Sarbjit Kaur has committed the murder of Harbans Singh husband of Sarbjit Kaur. The only circumstantial evidence in the shape of submission of Ram Singh and the confessional statement of co-accused Gurpreet Singh has been gathered. The statement of husband of the petitioner and her mother-in-law regarding the suspicion of petitioner having illicit relation with co-accused Gurpreet Singh are sufficient enough to arrive at conclusion at this stage that the petitioner had actively participated in the killing of Harbans Singh. Neither any injury nor any

¶23

¶24

Criminal Misc. No. M-29774 of 2010

¶25

specific over tract has been attributed to her even if it is presumed for the sake of arguments that she along with her real sister had illicit relations with Gurpreet Singh. If the said allegation is sufficient to establish a conspiracy would be debatable during trial.

¶26

Without expression of any opinion on merits of the case, it is sufficient to observe that the petitioner is in custody we.f. 19.12.2009, the material evidence has already been produced. No useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody.

¶27

Petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released

¶28

on her furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the

¶29

trial court.

¶30

[M.M.S.BEDI] JUDGE

¶31

20^th September, 2011 Shivani Kaushik

Harjinder Kaur v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harjinder Kaur v. State of Punjab

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

Gurjant Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ravinder Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Harphool Chand Vs State of Pb. & Ors.

Parminder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Gurmej Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Asha Rani Vs State of Punjab and Anr.