Gurcharan Singh vs State of Punjab

M.L. Singhal, J.

This is an application moved by Gurcharan Singh for the grant of bail to him in case FIR No. 98 dated 20.12.1997 registered under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station, Tanda.

Prosecution case in brief is that Hardeep Kaur alias Babbo daughter of Des Raj was married to Gurcharan Singh son of Thakar Singh resident of village Dehriwal on 25.5.1997. Des Raj had given adequate dowry in marriage according to his financial capacity. Hardeep Kaur went to her parental home 20 days after the marriage and she told her fatherDes Raj and mother Daya Devi that "her husbandGurcharan Singh has illicit relations with his sisterinlaw Smt. Swatanter Kumari alias Santo" (brother''s wife). Smt. Hardeep Kaur alias Babbo tried to dissuade her husband from carrying on with his sisterinlaw Smt. Swatanter Kumari alias Santo but she was warned by Gurcharan Singh and his sisterinlaw Swatanter Kumari alias Santo that if she was interested in putting up in the matrimonial home, she would have to tolerate their carrying on in illicit intimacy and that she would have to face serious consequence in case she stood in their way and created any hurdle". After hearing what was conveyed to Des Raj and his wife by Hardeep Kaur alias Babbo, they accompanied Hardeep Kaur to the matrimonial home and left her (Hardeep Kaur alias Babbo) at the house of her inlaws. Hardeep Kaur again visited his parents in the last week of June, 1997 and told her father that her husband Gurcharan Singh and Bharjai Swatanter Kumari alias Santo were asking for Rs. 50,000/ because Gurcharan Singh was to go abroad. Thereupon, Des Raj, his brother Karnail Singh and Hardeep Kaur went to inlaws of Hardeep Kaur and informed them that they were poor unable to satisfy their demand. Gurcharan Singh and Swatanter Kumari alias Santo told that they were repenting having Gurcharan Singh married to the daughter of such poor parents. Gurcharan Singh and Swatanter Kumari alias Santo demanded Karra, fridge and television but they showed their inability to fulfil their demand. They left Hardeep Kaur at the matrimonial home boosting her morale saying that they would be visiting her inlaws again. On 5.7.1997 he was informed by Surinder Singh son of Rakha Ram of village of the inlaws of Hardeep Kaur that Hardeep Kaur alias Babbo had died at about 7.00 a.m. and they should reach for her cremation. Thereupon, Des Raj, his wife, his brother Karnail Singh, Sarpanch Balwant Singh and some neighbours, reached village Dehriwala. At that time as they were feeling worried, they did not direct their attention towards knowing the cause of the death of Hardeep Kaur and therefore did not initiate any legal action against Gurcharan Singh and Swatanter Kumari alias Santo. After the receipt of the report of the chemical examiner, who found some poisonous substance in the viscera of Hardeep Kaur, they suspected foul play in her death. Matter was reported to the Police by Des Raj on 20.12.1997, in which he alleged that his daughter had consumed some poisonous substance because was fed up with Gurcharan Singh and his sisterinlaw Swatanter Kumari alias Santo on account of their illicit intimacy and also their demand for dowry.

Smt. Hardeep Kaur alias Babbo''s death took place after 40/42 days of her marriage at the house of her inlaws. Her was an unnatural death as poison was detected in her viscera by the chemical examiner. Matter was raked up in December, 1997 i.e. after 5 months of her death. It was either dowry death or it was death because Hardeep Kaur alias Babbo could not tolerate her husband carrying on with his sisterinlaw Swatantar Kumari alias Santo.

Prayer of bail of the petitioner was declined earlier by this Court in Crl. Misc. No. 3543M of 1998 on 18.3.1998. Case is fixed for prosecution evidence for 26.10.1998. Petitioner has been in jail for the last more that 9 months. It may also be mentioned that the coaccusedSwatanter Kumari alias Santo of the petitioner was allowed even prearrest bail by this Court. In the facts and circumstances of the case, learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial till 30.11.1998. If the trial remains unconcluded till 30.11.1998, petitioner shall be deemed to be on bail. With this direction this petition stands disposed of.