IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No.5228 -M of 2010 DATE OF DECISION : MARCH 02, 2010 NACHHATTAR KAUR ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. RK Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl.AG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed for bail in case FIR No.86 dated 11.5.2009 under Section 304-B, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, City Sunam, District Sangrur. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been summoned under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure, for commission of offence under Section 304-B, Indian Penal Code, as an additional accused, vide order dated 12.12.2009 (Annexure P-8). The petitioner was taken in custody on 2.2.2010. I have considered the contention. The petitioner, after investigation, was shown in column No.2 Criminal Misc. No.5228 -M of 2010 2 of the final report under Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure. One opinion of innocence has come on the record. The petitioner has been summoned as an additional accused in an application under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure. Proceedings under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure, are more by way of a complaint. The presence of the petitioner was required to be secured, which objective has already been achieved. In view of the above, this petition is allowed. Bail to the satisfaction of the trial court. March 02, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?