Balwinder Singh vs State of Punjab

Alok Singh, J.—Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is the father-in-law and is aged about 62 years. He has further stated that as on date, there is no material to prove that there was any dowry demand soon before the death of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that there can be no apprehension of tampering with the evidence since entire presumption is against the husband and in-laws. He further states that no useful purpose shall be served in keeping the old aged father-in-law behind the bars and he is in judicial custody since 16.6.2009 and till date no prosecution witness has been examined.

Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from ASI Raminder Singh, has stated that all the 21 witnesses are yet to be examined and they shall be examined at the earliest.

Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that since this is a case of Section 304-B IPC, hence the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, in the opinion of this Court, since no witness has yet been examined and the petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.6.2009, hence the petitioner, who is father-in-law, must be enlarged on bail.

Present petition is allowed. Let the petitioner be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Ordered accordingly.