AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
17 paragraphs · 332 wordsManjari Nehru Kaul, J
Instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.PC for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.199 dated 09.08.2020 registered under
Sections 306 and 34 IPC,1860 at Police Station Kathunangal District Amritsar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that only allegation levelled against the petitioner is that she was the friend of Ramandeep Kaur
(wife of the deceased) and had been staying with her and alleged paramour Kamaljit Singh @ Kamal when the deceased ended his life. It has further
been contended that the petitioner, who is in custody since 01.09.2020, has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question. A perusal of the allegations
levelled in the FIR do not attract the mischief of Section 306 IPC as only vague allegations have been levelled against the petitioner of extending
threats to the deceased for getting a case registered against him for kidnapping his own daughter. It has also been contended that similarly situated co-
accused Prabhjot Kaur and Kamaljit Singh have since been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court.
Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to controvert the factual aspect of
the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He on instructions from SI Harparkash Singh has submitted that the challan stands
presented and charges are likely to be framed on the next date of hearing.
Heard.
In view of the submissions made by learned counsel and the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 01.09.2020, the trial is unlikely to
conclude in the near future more so in the wake of outbreak of pandemic Covid-19. Hence, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is
admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be
construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
