Raghbir Singh vs State of Punjab

K.S. Kumaran, J.

These two petitions for bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. arise from the same FIR No. 55 dated 20.7.1999 of Police Station Kurali under Sections 494A, 307, 406, 506, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, therefore, are being disposed of by this common order. The F.I.R. has been registered on the statement of Harmanjit Kaur, she has alleged that she was married on 7.3.1999, that her motherinlaw Joginder Kaur (petitioner in Crl. Misc. No. 22285M of 1999), her brotherinlawRaghbir Singh and his wife Jasbir Kaur (both of then are petitioners in Crl. Misc. No. 22137M of 1999) and her husband Sulakhan Singh have been harassing and taunting her by saying that she should bring Maruti car or a sum of Rs. 1 lakh in cash. It is also alleged that on one day they threatened to kill her. She has also alleged that these persons also beat her making the same demand. According to the complainant on 8.7.1999, they locked her in a room and while Raghbir Singh held her from her arms, her sisterinlaw held her from legs and threw her on the floor and her motherinlaw held her from her hairs, her husband Sulakhan Singh forcibly administered some poisonous liquid in her month. She alleged that she was admitted in the PGI where her brother and uncle got her treated. The petitioners approached the Sessions Court, Ropar, for bail, but the Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar, dismissed their bail applications. Therefore, they have approached this Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for similar relief.

The learned Counsel for the petitionersRaghbir Singh and Jasbir Kaur contends that they are residing separately from Sulakhan Singh and that all the dowry articles have been returned. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also contends that petitioner Joginder Kaur is an old lady of 65 years who is even unable to walk. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also contends that the allegations against the petitioners are vague and general except for the allegation that Joginder Kaur motherinlaw caught hold of the hair of the complainant while the petitionerRaghbir Singh caught hold her from arms and his wife held her from her legs and threw her on the floor.

They also contend that it is only the husband who is alleged to have poured some poisonous liquid into the mouth of the complainant. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail.

Taking into consideration the arguments put forward but, at the same time without meaning to express any opinion on the merits of this case, I am of the view that the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail.

Both the petitions are allowed.

The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on in the event of their arrest on the allegations found in the F.I.R. mentioned in this petition on their furnishing sufficient surety to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

However, if the association of any of the petitioners is necessary for the purposes of investigation, the Investigating Officer shall issue notice to them giving them sufficient time for associating him/her with the investigation. On such notice, the petitioners shall associate with the investigation.

They shall also abide by the provision of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.