IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. M. No.21062-M of 2010 Date of Decision:20.8.2010 Jatinder Pal Kaur .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Bhoop Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab. Mr. H.S. Baath, Advocate for the complainant. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (Oral) Prayer made in the present petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.236 dated 21.9.2008 registered under Sections 302/364-A/201/120-B IPC at Police Station Jagaron District Ludhiana. It is contended that the allegation against the present petitioner is only to the extent that she was having illicit relationship with the main accused-Baljinder Singh. However, Sukhchain Singh before whom the extra judicial confession was made, has not alleged anything against the present petitioner nor attributed any role or active involvement in the said murder of Basant Singh. Heard. The petitioner had earlier filed Crl. M. No.7244-M of 2010 for the same relief, which was dismissed by the High Court vide order dated 12.5.2010 while recording as under: “ Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time seeks permission to withdraw the instant bail petition with prayer that the trial Court be directed to expedite the trial. Dismissed as withdrawn. Crl. M. No.21062-M of 2010 -2- Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and prosecution is also directed to expedite its evidence.” The present bail petition has been filed after only three months of the earlier bail application. No fresh ground has been raised except that the statements of Sukhchain and PW-Harnek Singh have been relied upon. However, the said statements were recorded before the order dated 12.5.2010 dismissing the earlier bail application was passed. Thus, the said order was available with the petitioner even on that date. It would not be proper to discuss the evidence at this stage; Lest it affects the merits of the case either way. Moreover, the evidence is still being recorded. The evidence of mother-in-law, who is supposed to be eye witness to the relationship of Baljinder Singh and the present petitioner, is yet to be recorded. This Court in the order dated 12.5.2010 passed in the earlier bail application, has already directed the trial Court to expedite the trial and the prosecution to expedite its evidence. No ground for bail is made out. Dismissed. 20.8.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE