IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.No.M-971 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision 02.03.2009 Mahinder Kaur ......Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL Present: Mr.Ravi Kant Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.S.S.Gill, Advocate, for the respondent-State. ***** PRITAM PAL, J(ORAL): Petitioner has brought this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for seeking anticipatory bail in case F.I.R. No.115 dated 17.08.2005 under Sections 302, 120-B I.P.C., registered at Police Station Lehra, District Sangrur. As per allegations of the prosecution and observations made by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moonak, District Sangrur, petitioner Mahinder Kaur, mother-in-law and Kulvinder Kaur, wife of Balwinder Singh @ Binder (since deceased) had administered poisonous substance to Balwinder Singh @ Binder at their house on the evening of 03.04.2005. It has also come during the investigation of the case that immediately after poisoner substance had been administered to the deceased Balwinder Singh @ Binder, a mobile call to his relation Gurvinder Singh was made by Balwinder Singh @ Binder from his mobile No.9315818180 to mobile No.9416289439 belonging to the aforesaid Gurvinder Singh to the effect Criminal Misc.No.M-971 of 2009 (O&M) -2- that he had been administered some poisonous substance by the aforesaid two ladies and thereafter he died on the way to the hospital in the same evening. During investigation of this case, the police had been connecting the accused with the commission of crime by relying upon a wrong mobile number of Balwinder Singh @ Binder Singh taking the same to be 9815818180 and not his real number i.e. 9315818180. This could be detected only by the A.D.G.P. (Intelligence), Punjab and ultimately, it was revealed that infact a mobile call was made from the aforesaid real mobile number of the deceased to the mobile number of Gurvinder Singh, whose statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein the call made by the deceased to Gurvinder Singh was confirmed. Now the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that infact earlier the cancellation report was sent to the Magistrate and that there was no occasion or any motive against the petitioner for committing the offence punishable under Sections 302 of I.P.C., as observed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moonak, in his order dated 04.09.2008. No doubt, earlier, the police had found the petitioner innocent during investigation but it appears that the investigation was not fair and the police had been gropping in the dark on account of wrong mobile number of the deceased, as stated above. Be that as it may, here in the instant case, Balwinder Singh @ Binder Singh is admittedly died in mysterious circumstances at his in-laws' house. At the time of occurrence, the petitioner, who is mother-in-law of the deceased and co-accused Kulvinder Kaur, who is the wife of the deceased were present in the house. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the Criminal Misc.No.M-971 of 2009 (O&M) -3- case, and seriousness and gravity of the offence, I feel that this case requires a custodial interrogation of the petitioner to dig out the truth of the offence. Even otherwise, it is well settled that provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C. are to be invoked sparingly and in exceptional circumstances which are lacking in the instant case. Hence, this petition is dismissed. March 02, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE