Cr.Misc. M 14567 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 14567 of 2011 Date of decision: 25.11.2011 Gurmeet Singh petitioner vs State of Punjab respondent Present:- Mr. APS Deol, Sr.Advocate with Mr. DB Singh, Advocate. Mr. PS Bajwa, DAG, Pb M.M.S.BEDI, J. Petitioner Gurmeet Singh seeks the concession of regular bail in a case of murder of Mann Singh and Jeewan Kaur, who are father-in- law and mother-in-law of the petitioner. The petitioner is the original informant in the case of murder of the above said two persons. He had lodged the FIR informing the police that on the night intervening 26/27 August, 2010, some unknown persons had committed the murder of his father-in-law and mother-in-law with sharp edged weapons. During the course of investigation, on the basis of circumstantial evidence, which was in the shape of statement of H.C. Paramjit Singh, P.S.Sardulgarh, who had heard the co-accused of the petitioner,namely, Darshan Singh, Makhan Singh and Sukhdev Singh, talking to each other regarding their involvement in the occurrence at the instance of Gurmeet singh peitioner, the petitioner was made an accused. Besides this, statement of PW Joga Singh was recorded during investigation, before whom Darshan Singh, Makhan Singh and Sukhdev Singh co-accused of the petitioner had Cr.Misc. M 14567 of 2011 2 allegedly made extra judicial confession having indulged in the crime at the instance of the petitioner. PW Surjit Singh is husband of Rajwinder Skaur, grand daughter of the deceased. He had allegedly seen Darshan Singh, Makhan Singh and Sukhdev Singh immediately after the occurrence. Statement of HC Paramjit Singh as a witness to the conspiracy has already been recorded. He has supported the case of the prosecution regarding conspiracy. Admissibility of his statement in context to the provisions of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, would certainly be debatable, especially when he is a police official of the same police Station. PW Joga singh, before whom the extra judicial confession had been made by the co-accused of the petitioner, has turned hostile while appearing as PW 1. Surjit Singh had seen the co-accused of the petitioner immediately after the occurrence. His testimony does not, in any manner, attribute any part to the petitioner. Taking into consideration the fact that the final decision of the trial hinges upon the debatable statement of PW 2 H.C. Paramjit Singh regrding conspiracy attributed to the petitioner; the petitioner having remained in custody w.e.f. 6.9.2010; the case of the prosecution being based upon only circumstantial evidence; there being no specific motive attributed, the petitioner can be granted the concession of bail. The petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail his on furnishing bail bonds/ surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court. November 25 , 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE