Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mukhtyar Singh vs State Of Haryana And Another on 19 May, 2023
CRA-S-1187-2022 (O&M) 1
2023:PHHC:073230
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.212 CRA-S-1187-2022 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 19.05.2023
Mukhtyar Singh .... Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA
Present: Ms. Anjali Sheoran, Advocate for the appellant.
Ms. Ankita Ahuja, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Rajnikant Upadhyay, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
3 2 2
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)
This appeal has been filed for setting aside the order dated
31.05.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar, granting
regular bail to respondent No.2/accused in case FIR No.74 dated 20.02.2022,
registered under Sections 304-B, 34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, at Police
Station City Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the relevant
facts and circumstances of the case were not taken into account by the trial
Court while granting bail to respondent No.2/husband of the deceased.
Marriage between the parties was solemnized on 07.03.2021, and the wife
committed suicide within a year of the marriage by hanging herself on
20.02.2022. She has referred to the statement of deceased's sister recorded
under Section 161 CrP.C., which has been placed on record as
Annexure A-8, to contend that the deceased was being subjected to
2023.05.22 19:26 harassment by the husband and his maternal grandmother. The conversation
I attest to the accuracy an
authenticity of this
order/judgment.
CRA-S-1187-2022 (O&M) 2
2023:PHHC:073230
of the deceased has been recorded in her Pen drive that was presented in the
Court. She also referred to the judgment of Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav
v. State of U.P. and another, 2022 SCC Online SC 672 to contend that the
bail has been granted by the trial Court on untenable grounds, i.e., the
medical condition of maternal grandmother of respondent No.2, aged about
80 years.
3. Learned State counsel assisted by counsel for respondent No.2,
submits that all relevant facts and circumstances were considered by the trial
Court while granting bail to respondent No.2. Learned State counsel further
submits that after framing of charges trial of the case is going on, and two of
the twenty six prosecution witnesses have already been examined.
4. The submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have
been considered.
5. A perusal of the order passed by the trial Court establishes that
respondent No.2 was released on regular bail by considering the nature of
allegations levelled against him. It was also noted that there was no specific
allegations against him regarding the demand of dowry. His availability for
trial of the case, as well as lack of apprehension of his tempering with the
evidence or influencing the witnesses was also considered. It was also noted
by the trial Court that the allegations of the deceased having been
pressurized to file mutual divorce petition by wrongly mentioning the date of
marriage, is also material since first motion statement of the deceased was
recorded before the Family Court concerned, and there is nothing to believe
that she did not testify voluntarily before the Court. Respondent No.2 was in
custody since 21.02.2022, and his custodial interrogation was not required,
nor any recovery was pending against him. It was also considered that his
presence would be required for taking care of his eighty years old
MANINDER . . .
2023.05.22 19:26 = grandmother. Besides, ever since the release of respondent No.2 on bail,
I attest to the accuracy
authenticity of this
order/judgment.
CRA-S-1187-2022 (O&M) 3
2023:PHHC:073230
there has not been any allegation against him of threatening the witnesses or
influencing the trial or of any other misconduct.
6. In view thereof, there is no ground to interfere with the
impugned order, and the appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of
as having been rendered infructuous.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA)
JUDGE
19.05.2023
Maninder
Whether speaking/reasoned__:: Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
MANINDER
2023.05.22 19:26
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this
order/judgment.
