CRM No.M-31491 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-2.12.2010 Ranjit Kaur wife of Teja Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr.Paramjit Singh Brar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, D.A.G., Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Petitioner Ranjit Kaur wife of Teja Singh, has applied for the grant of regular bail in a case registered against her alongwith her other co-accused, namely, Amrik Singh (husband), Teja Singh (father-in-law), Sukhchain Singh (brother-in-law) and Paramjit Kaur (sister-in-law) of the deceased, by virtue of FIR No.7 dated 15.4.2010 for the commission of offences punishable under sections 304-B and 498-A IPC by the police of Police Station Bajakhana, Distt.Faridkot, invoking the provisions of section 439 Cr.PC. 2. Concisely, according to the prosecution that marriage of Kuldeep Kaur was solemnized with Amrik Singh, son of the petitioner, three years prior to the present occurrence. Her parents were stated to have given sufficient dowry articles at the time of marriage, but the accused were not satisfied with the same. It was claimed that after one year of the marriage, they started harassing the deceased on account of bringing lesser dowry and cash. 3. Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the prosecution claimed that deceased Kuldeep Kaur alias Charanjit Kaur died un-natural death, within seven years of her marriage and the accused treated her with cruelty on account of and in connection with demand of dowry. On the basis of aforesaid allegations and in the wake of statement of complainant CRM No.M-31491 of 2010 2 Balvir Singh, father of the deceased, the present case was registered against the accused, in the manner indicated here-in-above. 4. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this regard. 6. What is not disputed here is that petitioner is mother-in-law of the deceased. Teja Singh, her husband, has already been allowed regular bail by this Court, vide order dated 15.9.2010 passed in CRM No.M-24886 of 2010 under similar circumstances. The allegations against the petitioner are general in nature. Originally, the case was registered against Sukhchain Singh and Paramjit Kaur as well, but during the course of investigation, they were found innocent and the police did not challan them. The main allegations of cruelty in connection with demand of dowry are assigned to main accused Amrik Singh, husband of the deceased, who is still in jail. The petitioner was arrested on 25.4.2010 and since then she is in judicial custody. No useful purpose would be served to further detain her in jail. Moreover, there is no history of previous involvement of the petitioner in any criminal case. 7. So, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as described here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial, to me, the present petitioner is entitled to regular bail in the obtaining circumstances of the instant case. 8. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the petition for regular bail is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot. 2.12.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge