Allowed

Sarabjit Kaur v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Jul 2021CRM-M/50603/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants pre-arrest bail to an aged petitioner accused of abetment to suicide. Building on her age, her co-accused having been granted bail, and the lack of need for custodial interrogation, the court makes earlier interim bail absolute.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted vide order dated 28.11.2019 is made absolute on conditions including appearance, no intimidation of witnesses, leaving India, and passport surrender.

Sarabjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

CRM-M- 50603 of 2019 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M- 50603 of 2019 (O&M) Date of decision : 15.7.2021

¶4

Sarabjit Kaur

¶5

................Petitioner vs.

¶6

State of Punjab

¶7

.................Respondent

¶8

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan

¶9

Present: Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. J.S. Ghuman, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

¶11

H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral)

¶12

Case taken up through video conferencing.

¶13

This petition for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.,

¶14

has been filed by petitioner – Sarabjit Kaur, aged about 60 years, w/o Jasmail Singh, resident of Old Jail Road, Near Amritsar Octroi, Kapurthala, an accused in FIR No. 160 dated 30.6.2019, for offences under Section306 IPC , registered at Police Station City, District Kapurthala.

¶15

Briefly stated, facts of the case, as per the prosecution story are that one Talwinder Singh, a computer teacher at MGN School,

¶16

BANITA CHUGH 2021.07.15 14:53 I agree to specified portions of this document

¶17

CRM-M- 50603 of 2019 -2-

¶18

Kapurthala, had committed suicide by hanging from the ceiling fan. He had left a suicide note naming various persons, who used to harass him, compelling him to take extreme step of committing suicide. Name of petitioner – Sarabjit Kaur figured in that suicide note. On the matter being reported to the police by widow of deceased, namely, Mrs. Maninder Kaur, formal FIR was recorded.

¶19

Apprehending her arrest in this case, petitioner-Sarabjit Kaur had approached the Court of Sessions at Kapurthala, craving for grant of anticipatory bail. Her application to that effect which was assigned to Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, was dismissed vide order dated 18.11.2019. As such the petitioner has approached this court, for grant of similar relief, which request is being opposed by the State counsel.

¶20

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, besides going through the record.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that petitioner is an aged woman of 62 years, not keeping good health; that she had not done any act which might have compelled the deceased to commit suicide; that she is not connected with the deceased in any manner. He has further contended that co-accused of the petitioner, who are similarly placed, have been granted the concession of anticipatory bail, namely, Ashwani Kumar, by allowing CRM-M-32950-2019(O&M); Kamal Varma by accepting CRM-M35963-2019(O&M) and Dalip Kumar @ Tunda by allowing CRMM-31511-2019(O&M), vide separate orders dated 25.11.2019 in all BANITA CHUGH 2021.07.15 14:53 I agree to specified portions of this document

¶22

CRM-M- 50603 of 2019 -3-

¶23

the three cases, by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He has placed on record copies of such orders in support of his contention, contending that the petitioner also deserves to be granted such concession on the ground of parity, rather her case is on better footing.

¶24

Though learned State counsel has opposed the petition, but he has not disputed the fact that co-accused of the petitioner namely, Ashwani Kumar, Kamal Varma and Dalip Kumar @ Tunda, have been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this court. Furthermore, in terms of order dated 28.11.2019, the petitioner has joined the investigation. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Devinder Singh, has stated that since no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner, her custodial interrogation is not required by the local police.

¶25

Thus in view of the detailed discussion above, the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 28.11.2019 is made absolute, subject to fulfillment of following conditions:-

¶26

i) that the petitioner shall appear in the Court on each and every date of hearing.

¶27

ii)that the petitioner shall not give any threat or intimidation to the prosecution witnesses.

¶28

iii)that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court.

¶29

iv)that the petitioner shall surrender her passport before the Investigating Officer and if she is not having passport then

¶30

BANITA CHUGH 2021.07.15 14:53 I agree to specified portions of this document

¶31

CRM-M- 50603 of 2019 -4-

¶32

she shall file an affidavit in that regard.

¶33

In case the petitioner violates any term and condition on which the bail has been granted to her, the prosecution would be entitled to apply for cancellation of bail.

¶34

The petition in that way is allowed.

¶35

( H.S. Madaan ) 15.7.2021 Judge chugh Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No

¶36

BANITA CHUGH 2021.07.15 14:53 I agree to specified portions of this document

Sarabjit Kaur v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarabjit 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Buta Singh Vs State of Punjab

Shamshad Khan and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Gurdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Gurpartap Singh @ Gobinda Vs State of Punjab

Shivani Sharma and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sangeeta and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Others