Criminal Misc.No.M-16046 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-9.9.2010 Bhajan Kaur wife of Shingara Ram and Shingara Ram son of Bhagat Ram ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Sarjeet Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr.Jagdev Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Having lost their right of bail in the Court of Session, the petitioners Bhajan Kaur and her husband Shingara Ram have directed the present petition for regular bail in a case registered against them, vide FIR No.450 dated 17.12.2009, on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under sections 304-B and 498-A read with section 34 IPC by the police of Police Station Tripuri, District Patiala, invoking the provisions of section 439 Cr.PC. 2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable help and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, the petitioners are entitled to bail. 4. As is evident from the record that a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Gurdev Singh, J.), while issuing notice, has passed the following order on 27.5.2010:- “Heard. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the Criminal Misc.No.M-16046 of 2010 2 petitioners that both the petitioners had been residing separately from their son to whom the deceased was married and a notice was got published in the newspaper much before the death of the nice of the complainant, vide which the son was disinherited and that false allegations have been levelled against them that they administered some poisonous substance to the deceased. A copy of the post mortem report has been placed on record. At the time of post mortem no such injury was found on the face or any other part of the dead body, which may suggest that poisonous substance was administered forcibly.” 5. The learned State counsel did not produce any material to rebut the above indicated grounds. Moreover, the petitioners are old aged parents-in-law of the deceased. All the main allegations are attributed to her husband, main accused Sandeep Kumar. It is not a matter of dispute that the petitioners were arrested on 18.12.2009 and since then they are in custody/jail. There is no likelihood of the trial being concluded earlier. To me, no useful purpose would be served in further detaining the petitioners in jail in their old age. 6. In the light of the aforesaid reasons and without commenting on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side, during the course of trial of the case, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/or in his absence, Duty Magistrate, Patiala. 7. The instant petition is disposed of accordingly. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) 9.9.2010 Judge AS