BALBIR KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application seeking regular bail in case FIR No.216 dated 31.10.2008 under Sections 307/498-A IPC, later on converted to Sections 302/304B IPC, P.S. Garhshankar, District Hoshiarpur.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner is the mother-in-law of the deceased and is in judicial custody w.e.f. 31.3.2009. She has further stated that despite of almost two years, all the prosecution witnesses have not been examined as yet and trial may take some time, therefore, in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble the Apex Court in the matter of State of Kerala Vs. Raneef, 2011(1) RCR (Criminal) 381, petitioner should be enlarged on bail because in the event of rejection of bail, time spent in the jail cannot be restored to the accused, if ultimately the accused is acquitted by the trial Court.

(3.) AFTER pouring water, fire is not possible by the mother-in-law. Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on the instructions of ASI Nirmal Singh, states that out of 18 witnesses, only four have been examined.