CRM-M No. 31404 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No. 31404 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:- 21.11.2011 Krishna Devi ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present:- Mr. Sanjay Vashisht, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Malik, Asst. A. G. Haryana. **** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not been attributed any involvement with regard to the burning of the daughter of the complainant. The allegation qua that aspect is only attributed to Tilak Raj, husband of the daughter of the complainant. He further contends that there was no specific demand with regard to the dowry or alleged beatings having been given in the FIR. Petitioner was arrested on 11.08.2011 and the case is now fixed for prosecution evidence. His further contention is that after the death of the daughter of the complainant, who was daughter-in- law of the petitioner, she has left behind 1½ years old female child and CRM-M No. 31404 of 2011 (O&M) -2- 6-7 months male child. There is no one to take care of them. Out of the five accused, three have been found innocent and challan has only been presented only against the husband of the deceased and the petitioner. He contends that trial is not likely to conclude soon and therefore, the petitioner be granted concession of bail. Counsel for the State contends that it was cumulative effect of the action taken by the husband and his mother which led and forced the death of the daughter-in-law. The petitioner, therefore, be not granted concession of bail. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records. Petitioner is 50 years old widow. No direct allegation has been levelled against her so far as the death of Suman @ Pooja daughter of the complainant is concerned. The only allegation in this regard is against her son namely Tilak Raj, who was the husband of the deceased. It is not in dispute that the there are two minor children to be looked after. The petitioner is in custody w.e.f. 11.08.2011. The trial of case is not progressed much and after framing of charges, now the case is fixed for prosecution evidence. The trial is not likely to conclude soon. After considering the matter, I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served by further keeping the petitioner in custody. The present application is allowed and she is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of trial Court. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) 21.11.2011 JUDGE harjeet