[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jeewan Singh Alias Jeon Singh vs State Of Punjab on 18 March, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
123
CRM-M-66214-2025 (O&M)
Date of decision: 18.03.2026
Jeewan Singh @ Jeon Singh ...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
State of Punjab ...Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Present :- Mr. Abhaysher Singh, Advocate and
Ms. Janya Sirohi, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG Punjab.
*****
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)
1. This third petition has been filed for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner(s) in case bearing FIR No.91 dated 24.06.2023, registered under
Section(s) 302, 34 (Section 201, 203, 182 added later on) of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 at Police Station City Malout, Sri Muktsar Sahib, after
withdrawal of earlier two petitions on 18.02.2025 and 10.07.2025.
2. FIR in the present case was registered on the statement of
Harnek Singh, who made a statement to the effect that :-
"xxxxxx they are two brothers. His elder brother is Jasvir
Singh. They are married and are separate in residence. Jasvir
Singh was married to Paramjit Kaur daughter of Bakhshish
Ram, resident of village Midda for the last 33-34 years. Jasvir
Singh was cancer patient. His sister-in-law Paramjit Kaur
proceeded on the wrong path. She used to bring females from
1 of 4
123 CRM-M-66214-2025 (O&M)
other villages in her house and indulged them in wrong work.
Jasvir Singh used to stop Paramjit Kaur from doing so. Due to
this reason, Jasvir Singh started taking liquor. Paramjit Kaur
was not caring Jasvir Singh properly. On 12.04.2023 at about
4:20 PM, his nephew Jiwan Singh alias Jeon telephonically
informed him that Jiwan Singh's father Jasvir Singh died on
account of cancer. Then about 30-35 minutes later, his sister-
in-law telephonically informed his wife Karamjit Kaur to come
quickly as they called doctor and doctor told that smell is
coming out from the dead body of Jasvir Singh, so they should
cremate him at the earliest. Then he along with his father
Chand Singh and his wife Karamjit Kaur went to the house of
Jasvir Singh. On reaching, they checked the dead body of
Jasvir Singh, then they found some mark on the neck of Jasvir
Singh due to which they took his dead body to Civil Hospital,
Malout, where his postmortem was got done and as per which,
Jasvir Singh died on account of strangulation and there was an
injury mark on his left wrist also. He is sure that Jasvir Singh
was murdered by his nephew and sister-in-law. xxxxxxx".
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the present FIR
was registered at the instance of paternal uncle of the petitioner after a gap
of nearly 2 ½ months of the alleged incident. He contends that the petitioner
has been in custody since 24.06.2023 and has undergone an actual custody
of nearly 02 years 09 months. He contends that as a matter of fact, the nature
of medical evidence is suggestive of death by suicide and not suggestive of
2 of 4
123 CRM-M-66214-2025 (O&M)
homicidal death on account of strangulation. He contends that the cause of
death is shown as asphyxia but the opinion is non-conclusive about the
manner and nature in which the asphyxia took place. He contends that the
placement of the ligature as well as the medical evidence thus strongly
refutes the ocular version set forth by the complainant. He submits that the
motive attributed by the complainant, against the petitioner and his mother is
to the effect that the mother of the petitioner used to indulge in human
trafficking and used to bring girls for prostitution with the active connivance
of the petitioner herein. He contends that the petitioner has no criminal
antecedents and as a matter of fact the deceased himself was allegedly
indulging in human trafficking. He contends that father of the petitioner was
not in a fit state of mind on account of his sufferance from cancer and
committed suicide as a result thereof. He contends that the petitioner and his
mother have been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant
with a view to take possession of the property belonging to the deceased. It
is contended that the conclusion of trial shall take a long time as only 15 out
of the total 33 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and 18 still
remain to be examined. He also submits that the complainant already stands
examined, hence, no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution version at
this stage.
4. Learned counsel for respondent-State, on the other hand,
contends that the petitioner has been specifically attributed to have caused
asphyxia as a result whereof his father died. He however does not dispute
that the petitioner has clean antecedents. The period of custody as well as
the stage of trial are not disputed.
3 of 4
123 CRM-M-66214-2025 (O&M)
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the facts and circumstances as noted above, including the
arguable issues with respect to the cause of death i.e. whether it is homicidal
or suicidal and motive as well, the clean antecedents of the petitioner, the
period of actual custody undergone by him as well as the stage of trial
bearing in mind that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time, I
deem it fit to allow the instant petition.
6. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is
ordered to be admitted to regular bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety
bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate
concerned.
7. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat
and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or
indirectly.
8. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an
expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the case
on the basis of available material.
(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
18.03.2026 JUDGE
Mangal Singh
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
