CRM No. M-1815 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-1815 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.03.2009 Kahni Devi ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Rajeev Kaswan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Gill, DAG, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that name of the petitioner did not figure in the FIR, registered at the instance of Madan Lal deceased. However, in the supplementary statements of Sandeep Kumar and Rajinder sons of Madan Lal, the petitioner was named for the first time. Even in the said supplementary statements, no role has been attributed to the petitioner in causing any injury either to the deceased or any of the injured. Only general allegations were levelled therein. The learned counsel has also submitted that another accused Guddi Devi alias Kamla Devi, whose name figured in the supplementary statements of Sandeep Kumar and Rajinder sons of Madan Lal, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated January 15, 2009. He further submits that the petitioner has been in custody for the last eight months and since the trial is likely to take long CRM No. M-1815 of 2009 2 time to conclude, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind bars during pendency of the trial. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial, as the trial may take time to conclude. In view of the fact that the petitioner is a lady and is local resident, chances of her absconding or tampering with the evidence is remote. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Ferozepur. Disposed of. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE March 09, 2009 'rajpal'