In the Punjab and Haryana High Court, at Chandigarh. CRM-M- 15910 of 2011 (O&M) Decided on Aug 26,2011 Ram Karan --Petitioner vs. State of Punjab --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.M.S.Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Rai,DAG Punjab. Rakesh Kumar Jain,J:(Oral) CRM-44506 of 2011 Allowed. Annexure P-6 is taken on record. CRM-M-15910 f 2011 This is a petition for regular bail pending trial under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short,'Cr.P.C.') in a case registered vide FIR No.228 dated 24.10.2006, under Section 302/34 IPC, at Police Station Patran, District Patiala. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Hari Singh deceased died on 16.8.2006 and Rapat No.10 dated 17.8.2006 was recorded by Amrik Singh ( brother of the deceased) in which he had alleged that his brother (Hari Singh) was a drug addict who might have died because of the over-dose of drug/liquor. He did not express any suspicion against any one but he claimed post mortem of the dead body of his brother. The FIR was registered on 24.10.2006 after about two months when it was found in the post mortem that deceased Hari Singh had died due to strangulation. In the said FIR, complainant Amrik Singh raised suspicion against Raj Kaur (wife of the deceased) and the present petitioner Ram Karan alleging that they had illicit relation and since Hari Singh (deceased) was an obstacle, therefore, they removed him from their way. It is submitted that Raj Kaur was arrested on 24.10.2006 and was alone facing the trial as the petitioner was never arrested. In para No.15 of his judgment, the trial Judge had observed that as to “whether Raj Kaur along with her co-accused Ram Karan Singh committed the murder of Hari Singh by strangulation during night hours on 16.8.2006”. The prosecution failed to prove its case and ultimately, on 12.6. 2008, Raj Kaur was acquitted. The petitioner was allegedly declared proclaimed offender on 15.8.2007 and was arrested on 26.12.2010 and is facing trial in custody. It is submitted that the prosecution is trying to prove its case against the petitioner with the same set of witnesses who have failed to prove the charge against Raj Kaur (co accused) . It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody from the last eight months. He was even declared proclaimed offender. He had left the village Dugal Kalan and had started living in District Jind. Therefore, he had never received any notice nor there was any affixation (chaspandgi) of the summons/warrants of the Court. He further submits that there is a likelihood of his acquittal in the present case and in order to ensure his regular appearance during the trial, the Court may impose strict condition. In reply, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner was declared proclaimed offender after three years and now the prosecution has examined two witnesses out of 16 witnesses and if he is released on bail, there is likelihood of his absconding. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon an order of this Court passed in CRM-M- 6810 of 2009 (Gurjeet Singh Vs. State of CRM-M- 15910 of 2011 (O&M) -3- Punjab) in which the accused absented on 21.3.2005 and was declared proclaimed offender on 24.4.2006. He was arrested on 29.1.2009, whereas other co-accused were acquitted and this Court had granted bail to the said accused. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case but without making any observations on the merit, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds with two heavy local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. August 26,2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge