Crl.M.No.21234-M of 2010(O&M) #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No.21234-M of 2010(O&M) Date of order: 7.9.2010 Gurnam Singh ....Petitioner vs. State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Vikas Vehl, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Crl.M.No.37604 of 2010 Application is allowed as prayed for. Crl.M.No.21234-M of 2010 Prayer under Section 439 Cr.P.C is for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.148 dated 14.10.2008 under Sections 306/120-B IPC, P.S Sadar Nawanshahar, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar. It is stated that Manjit Kaur (since deceased), daughter of the complainant-Chain Ram was married with Satnam Singh in the year 2004 and a son out of the wedlock was born. Satnam Singh for the last three years is stated to be employed in Saudi Arabin and said Manjit Kaur was living with her mother-in-law, namely, Siso in the village whereas the petitioner-Jeth was residing separately with his wife and five children. As per allegations levelled by the complainant, petitioner-Jeth used to harass/tease Manjit Kaur-daughter of the complainant and on 14.10.2008, he was informed by his other daughter Surjit Kaur that the petitioner was teasing Manjit Kaur in her house in the absence of her Crl.M.No.21234-M of 2010(O&M) #2# mother-in-law. It is further stated that the complainant along with one Tarsem Lal rushed to the residential house of Manjit Kaur, where they saw the petitioner coming out of the house and found that Manjit Kaur had consumed some poisonous substance, which resulted in her death. Learned counsel submits that only allegations against the petitioner are that he used to harass the deceased as a result whereof she committed suicide. He further submits that the main witnesses i.e complainant and the sister of the deceased, namely, Surjit Kaur have deposed before the trial Court and from their deposition (reproduced in the body of the petition) no case of abetment to sucide is made out against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 14.10.2008 and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future and, therefore he prays for grant of bail. Learned state counsel does not refute the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than one year and eleven months and that the main prosecution witnesses have been examined. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case or on the deposition of the prosecution witnesses and in view of the custody period and the fact the main witnesses have been examined, I find no valid ground to keep the petitioner in custody any longer. Accordingly, petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Nawanshahr. September 07, 2010 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE