Rajvinder Kaur vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed for grant of regular bail in connection with the First Information Report No. 631 of 2022, registered at police station Kashipur District Udham Singh Nagar. Applicant is in judicial custody under Section 302 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

As per prosecution case, on 13.10.2022 at around 08.20 a.m., informant’s uncle Mahal Singh was reading the newspaper at his house. Two unknown persons came on a motorcycle and fired, due to which, Mahal Singh died on the spot. Six-seven days before this incident, Mahal Singh received a phone call from Harjeet Singh from Canada. He was demanding money from Mahal Singh. He (Harjeet Singh) had threatened to kill him (Mahal Singh) for not giving the money. FIR was registered on 13.10.2022 at 23:09 hrs against Harjeet Singh. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant and co-accused persons.

Heard Mr. S.R.S. Gill and Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned AGA for the State and Mr. Amanjoot Singh, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Aditya Singh, learned counsel for the informant/victim.

Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate, contended that applicant is not named in the First Information Report. She has been falsely implicated in the present matter only on the basis of the confessional statements of co-accused Prabhujot Singh alias Pannu and other co-accused persons. Applicant was arrested on 18.10.2022 and according to the confessional statements of the applicant, she had served food to the co-accused Manpreet Singh and Sadhu Singh. Apart from the confessional statements, there is no other evidence against the applicant and the applicant had no motive to commit the said offence. Co-accused Sukhdev Singh Bajwa has been granted bail by this Court.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Amanjoot Singh, Advocate have opposed the bail application. However, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, AGA, for the State, submits that apart from the confessional statements, there is no other evidence against the applicant.

Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Applicant is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no likelihood of applicant absconding as well. She is in custody since 18.10.2022.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

The Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant – Rajvinder Kaur be released on bail on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and she will not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon her, prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.