CRM No. M-6158 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-6158 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.03.2009 Narinder Kaur alias Nindro ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J. This is a petition seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered against the petitioner at Police Station Dina Nagar, District Gurdaspur, vide FIR No.223 dated 5th November, 2008, under Sections 304-B, 307 read with Section 34 IPC. The case was registered as a result of death of one Harpreet Kaur at her matrimonial home within two years of her marriage. The husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law (Nanand) are accused in the case at the moment. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is unmarried sister-in-law of the deceased and she has no role to play in the crime. He has stated that in the initial FIR, name of the petitioner did not figure. Even the eye-witness Kailasho Devi had not named the petitioner. According to the counsel, name of the petitioner CRM No. M-6158 of 2009 2 for the first time appeared in the dying declaration made by the deceased. The said dying declaration thus could not be believed, the same being result of tutoring. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have seen the dying declaration Annexure P-3/T to the petition. The said dying declaration had been recorded by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Pathankot on 7th November, 2008. The dying declaration is in question- answer form. In answer to one of the question asked by the Magistrate, the deceased clearly stated that the petitioner (Nanand) caught hold of her arms, her mother-in-law poured kerosene oil on her and her husband set her ablaze. The deceased further said that she was harassed for demand of dowry by all three of them and they also used to beat her for bringing less dowry. Considering the fact that name of the petitioner has been clearly mentioned in the dying declaration recorded by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Pathankot, I do not find it a fit case for grant of concession of anticipatory bail. The fact that the name of the petitioner did not figure in the FIR or in the statement of the alleged eye-witness, is not material as her name has clearly figured in the dying declaration. The petition is thus devoid of merit and is dismissed as such. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE March 19, 2009 'rajpal'