Crl.M.No.M-20243 of 2011(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-20243 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: July 13, 2011 Daya Ram .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.B.S.Seewak, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.No.35234 of 2011 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-20243 of 2011 The present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.149, dated 17.5.2010, registered under Section 304-B read with Section 34 IPC and Section 302 read with Section 120-B IPC, at Police Station Baldev Nagar, Ambala. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully. This is third application for grant of regular bail filed on behalf of the petitioner-accused. His earlier application of bail was got dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 9.12.2010 passed in Crl.M.No.M-36006 of 2010. Second bail application was also got dismissed as withdrawn, after arguing for some time, vide order dated 9.2.2011 passed in Crl.M.No.M- 1663 of 2011. Crl.M.No.M-20243 of 2011(O&M) -2- Brief allegations against petitioner-accused are that he is father- in-law of the deceased -Rajni, who was married to son of present petitioner Parminder Singh @ Pammi. She was found dead in the matrimonial home and as per medical evidence, she died on account of injuries including head injury. It has been rightly observed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, while dismissing the application of the petitioner-accused, that this is for the petitioner-accused to explain as to how a living person turned into corpse in the matrimonial home and how she received injuries. So far as argument of learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that he used to live separate is concerned, no finding can be given in this regard, at this stage. There are specific allegations against the petitioner- accused that he alongwith co-accused used to harass the deceased on account of dowry. There are also allegations that just two days before this occurrence 15,000/- were deposited in the account of husband of the deceased by the complainant just to fulfill their demand of Rs.50,000/-. Allegations are also that there was pressure upon the deceased to dispose off her house in order to shift to Panchkula. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has been filed by prosecution for summoning one Chaman Singh as an accused in this case. However, filing of an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. against some other person as an accused does not mean that petitioner-accused is innocent. Case is still at the stage of prosecution evidence. Material witnesses are yet to be examined. There are serious allegations against the petitioner-accused. Hence, it is not such a case in which concession of bail should be granted to Crl.M.No.M-20243 of 2011(O&M) -3- petitioner-accused, at this stage. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Daya Ram for grant of regular bail is hereby dismissed being devoid of any merit. 13.7.2011 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge