CRM No. M-1280 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-1280 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.03.2009 Balwinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. R.K. Kapila, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J. The petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him under Section 304-B read with Section 34 IPC, vide FIR No.39 dated 5th June, 2008 at Police Station Khalra, District Taran Taran. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been arraigned as accused without any role in the alleged crime. It is only on the basis of presumption contained in Section 304-B IPC that the present FIR has been registered. Learned counsel for the State has, however, opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that there are clear cut allegations against the petitioner in the FIR. According to the counsel, the complainant had alleged that Paramjit Kaur was being subjected to ill-treatment in her matrimonial home due to dowry demands and she had been killed by her in-laws including brother-in-law. The petitioner, CRM No. M-1280 of 2009 2 who is brother-in-law (Jeth), has also been named in the FIR. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. From the FIR, it is clear that the complainant has alleged that the deceased had been turned out of her matrimonial house. However, later on her parents had prevailed upon her and had left the deceased again in her in-laws house. The girl Paramjit Kaur, however, died thereafter apparently due to poisoning by some insecticide of chlorocompound group. In view of serious allegations against the petitioner in the FIR, I do not find it a fit case for grant of concession of pre-arrest bail to him. The petition is devoid of merit. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE March 27, 2009 'rajpal'