Crl.M.No.M-20420 of 2011(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-20420 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: September 12, 2011 Pavel Sandhu .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.D.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.K.S.Sivia, DAG, Punjab. ..... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.96, dated 30.6.2009, registered under Sections 306, 34 IPC, at Police Station Chherretta Amritsar City, Amritsar. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Amritsar, vide which application filed by petitioner-accused for grant of regular bail was declined. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- accused that he had contracted a love marriage with deceased and, however, parents of deceased were not agreed to this marriage. Further contends that his wife had been trying to persuade her parents to agree with her marriage with petitioner and, however, her parents did not agree and hence, she used to remain frustrated. Further contends that petitioner never harassed his Crl.M.No.M-20420 of 2011(O&M) -2- wife. It is further contended that he has been continuing in custody since June 2009 and that trial has not been concluded so far. It is also contended that main witnesses have already been examined. Further contends that father of petitioner was also an accused in this case and that he died during pendency of this case only on account of this case. Further contends that mother of petitioner is also seriously ill and bed ridden. It has also been contended that there are only general allegations of alleged harassment and that there is no specific allegation against petitioner-accused. Bail application has been opposed by learned State counsel on the plea that allegations against petitioner-accused are serious in nature. However, there are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Hence, taking into consideration the aforementioned facts, particularly in view of the fact that petitioner has been continuing in custody since June 2009 and his father already expired and his mother is on death bed, I am of the view that it is a fit case in which concession of regular bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Pavel Sandhu for grant of regular bail is allowed. Bail to the satisfaction of CJM/Duty Magistrate, Amritsar. 12.9.2011 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge