Narinder Kaur vs State Of Punjab

Gurvinder Singh Gill, J

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.167 dated 24.12.2020 at

Police Station Dehlon, District Ludhiana under Sections 306 and 34 of Indian Penal Code.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Sarabjit Kaur, wherein it has been alleged that her husbhand was running a shoe shop since the last 22-23

years. He had borrowed some money for his business. On 23.12.2020 at about 9:00 AM her husband while leaving for his shop, told her that Narinder

Kaur, Harjit Singh @ Mani, Laddi, Ramesh and one unknown persons were harassing him in connection with some monetary transactions and that he

will disclose the details in the evening. It is alleged that in the afternoon the complainant’s husband, however, committed suicide. It is further the

case of prosecution that a suicide note was left by the deceased wherein he wrote that he was commiting suicide as he had borrowed an amount of `2

lakhs from Narinder Kaur, Harjit Singh @ Mani but they have got recorded the amount of `6 lakhs in agreement. He further named Laddi, Ramesh

and one unknown person to be the responsible.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even if the FIR is taken to be correct still the petitioner cannot be attributed any overt act from

which it could be said that she has abetted the commission of suicide. It has further been submitted that infact an agreement had been executed on

stamp paper by the deceased in favour of the petitioner and in these circumstances the entire prosecution story would fall to ground.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and also in the suicide note, no case

for grant of bail is made out.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case especially that the petitioner is named not only in the FIR but also in the suicide note, it is

certainly a case where custodial interrogation would be required to unearth the truth. The petition is sans merit and is hereby dismissed.

It is, however, directed that in case the petitioner surrenders before the trial Court within a period of 10 days from today and applies for grant of

regular bail, the learned trial Court shall endeavour expeditiously preferably within a period of one application. to dispose of the same week from filing

of such