Gurmeet Singh vs State of Haryana

Bakhshish Kaur, J.

Petitioners are seeking bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No. 29 dated March 31, 1999 under Sections 302/120 IPC read with Sections 27/54/59 of the Arms Act.

The allegation against the petitioners, as contended by Mr. R.S. Cheema, learned counsel for the petitioners, is that they have been labelled as conspirators and that too, on the basis of statement of Rajbir son of Ajmer Singh, brother of Baljinder Kaur, one of the deceased. Originally, the case was registered against Sahab Singh, Lakhmir Singh and Darshan Singh, who had been specifically named therein. Now, surprisingly, after a period of two months of the submission of challan, the Investigation Officer recorded the statement of Rajbir Singh on August 3, 1999 with an ulterior motive.

On August 3, 1999 Rajbir Singh has reported to the SHO/PS Nangal as under :

"On the night of 30.3.1999, my sister Baljinder Kaur who was married to Gurmeet Singh son of Sahab Singh was murdered by Sahab Singh, Darshan Singh and Lakhmir Singh. In the conspiracy to murder my sister, his mother Nasibo, his uncle (Tau) Babu Ram, Malkiat, Chetan sons of Babu Ram, Gurnamo wife of Babu Ram and Jarnailo wife of Darshan Singh, were also involved because they used to harass my sister on one pretext or the other. Action may also be kindly against them for the murder of my sister."

From the statement of Rajbir as above, it is clear that only vague and unfounded allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and they have been roped in simply because the brother of the deceased was inimical towards them.

Mr. R.S. Cheema, learned counsel, therefore, contended that when different versions are coming forth, the one favouring the accused must be accepted.

To meet this argument, Ms. Suraksha Sharma, learned counsel representing the State of Haryana, assisted by Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, urged that in this case of double murder, the petitioners who had been specifically named by Rajbir, the brother of the deceased Baljinder Kaur, are not entitled to the concession of bail. They all had played an important role in the elimination of Baljinder Kaur, they being conspirators, are not entitled to any lenient view to be taken in the matter.

Mr. R.S. Cheema, learned counsel also submitted that apart from the fact that the petitioners were not named in the FIR at the initial stage and that they have been roped in only on the basis of report made by Rajbir on August 3, 1999 i.e. five months after the occurrence, there is another aspect of the case i.e. affidavit of Baljinder Kaur, Annexure P. 1, dated December 31, 1998. Relevant portion of the affidavit reads as under :

"3. That Gurmail Singh son of Gurdial Singh, resident of village Ismailpur, District Kapurthala, is my brotherinlaw (Jeeja), who kept on coming in the absence of my husband and I also used to go and live with him, which was not considered proper by my husband and rest of the family, but I was not prepared to sever my relations with him and there used to be quarrel between me and my husband.

xx xx xx

That my husband filed a suit in the court against me and Gurmail. On receiving the summons, I also filed a suit against Gurmeet and his family on the asking of Gurmail Singh, which was unfounded.

That when Panchayat collected, then I conceded my fault and promised that if one chance is given to me, I would not have any relations with Gurmail Singh and shall live with my husband. On the asking of the Panchayat, Gurmeet relented and brought me home."

The Affidavit dated December 31, 1998 Annexure P.1 is certainly not the deciding factor so far as the present bail application is concerned, but the fact remains that the occurrence had taken place only thereafter on March 31, 1999. While deciding the petition for bail, nature of evidence collected by the prosecution and the defence put up by the accused is to be seen. Considering the fact that the petitioners were not named in the FIR at the initial stage, rather for the first time, they were named by Rajbir, brother of the deceased Baljinder Kaur, only on August 13, 1999, i.e. five months after the occurrence, then under these circumstances, the petitioners are entitled to bail.

In the result, this Crl. Misc. petition is accepted and petitioners are admitted to bail to the satisfaction of trial Court.