Criminal Misc. No.M-4439 of 2011 1 .. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-4439 of 2011 Date of Decision : 25.03.2011 Shamsher Singh ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. Deepak Nayar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shilesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Ms. G.K.Mann, Advocate, for the complainant. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) This is an application filed by Shamsher Singh under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in case bearing First Information Report No.3 dated January 3rd, 2011 under Sections 304-B of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sultanwind, District Amritsar. 2. Inderjit Kaur alias Rimpy (since deceased) daughter of Jaspal Singh-complainant was married with Shamsher Singh on November 16th, 2007. A female child was born out of the wed lock. On June 27th, 2010 she was present at her father's house. Shamsher Singh had gone to her in-laws house to fetch his wife and child. All of a sudden, she became unconscious. She was evacuated to the hospital where she was declared 'brought dead'. Statement (Exhibit P/3) of Jaspal Singh was recorded in the Police Station on the same day, wherein, he stated that he had no suspicion on any one. Post mortem examination was conducted on the dead body. Criminal Misc. No.M-4439 of 2011 2 .. viscera of the deceased was sent to Chemical Examiner to Government, Punjab. He opined that death occurred on account of consuming Organo-phosphorus pesticide. A suspicion arose against Shamsher Singh that he had administered some poisonous substance to the deceased because after the occurrence, he immediately left the house. The matter was also investigated by Assistant Commissioner of Police, South Amritsar City and he also submitted his report (Annexure R/1) that allegations levelled by Jaspal Singh against the petitioner were found to be correct. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that there was inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. The occurrence took place on June 27th, 2010, whereas the FIR was recorded on January 3rd, 2011, that is, after more than 6 months of the occurrence which shows that it was recorded after consultation and confabulation. 4. It is the case of prosecution that on June 27th, 2010 itself, Jaspal Singh – complainant had reported the matter to the Police that his daughter became unconscious and was brought to the hospital, where she was declared 'brought dead'. However, it was mentioned in the statement that Shamsher Singh – petitioner was present in the house. Prior to the registration of the FIR, as stated by the State counsel, the complainant moved an application before the higher Police authorities to investigate the matter thoroughly because he had suspicion against the petitioner. However, after receipt of the report of Chemical Examiner, Punjab, wherein, it was found that she died on account of consuming of poisonous substance, the FIR was registered. At this stage, this Court would not like to discuss the consequences of lodging of report with the Police after six months because it may prejudice the case of either party. 5. The power exercisable under Section 438 Cr.P.C is somewhat extraordinary in character and it is only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or Criminal Misc. No.M-4439 of 2011 3 .. where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to otherwise misuse his liberty, then power is to be exercised under Section 438. It is also to be seen that the course of investigation is not obstructed. A perusal of FIR shows that there appears to be sufficient material evidence against the petitioner, which dis-entitles him to pre-arrest bail. Thus, the application is dismissed. (NAWAB SINGH) JUDGE 25.03.2011 som