CRM No. M-2570 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-2570 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 9.9.2009 Gurpreet Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J (oral). This is a petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections 302/201 IPC at Police Station G.R.P. Bathinda, vide FIR No.62 dated 8th September, 2007. The allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith co-accused Meena and Harpal Singh alias Palli committed murder of one Prehlad Singh on the intervening night of 4th/5th September, 2007. After committing the offence, they knowingly and deliberately placed the body on the railway track to destroy evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that there is no evidence available on record to connect the petitioner with the crime. He, thus, deserves to be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the State has, however, opposed the CRM No. M-2570 of 2009 2 prayer submitting that one of the accused, namely, Harpal Singh had suspicion that deceased had evil eye on his wife. A prosecution witness Darshan Singh had heard the accused talking about committing of murder of Prehlad Singh by them. Another prosecution witness Gurdip Singh had seen the accused in the company of Prehlad Singh some time prior to the occurrence. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of the case. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. The argument of counsel for the petitioner that there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the crime, is devoid of force. The evidence, even if circumstantial, cannot be ignored from consideration. The trial of the case is still proceeding. Keeping in view the nature of crime, the manner of commission of the same and the punishment, it would entail in case of conviction, I do not find it a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on bail. The petition is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE September 09, 2009 'rajpal'