LAWS(P&H)-2002-5-220

NACHHATTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On May 28, 2002
NACHHATTAR SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner - Nachhattar Singh has filed this petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for grant of bail in case bearing First Information Report No. 46 dated 18.4.2000 Punder Section 304-B and 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Dhanaula.

(2.) The present case was registered on the statement of Chintan Singh, resident of Nangal Khurd, Chintan Singh had two daughters namely Birpal Kaur and Harpreet Kaur, Birpal Kaur, aged 24 years and Harpreet Kaur, aged 22 years were married to Sukhwinder Singh and Sukchain Singh sons of Nachhattar Singh resident of Hari Garh. Right from the inception of marriage. Birpal Kaur was harassed by her father-in-law Nachhattar Singh mother-in-law Balbir Kaur, sister-in- law Rani and brother-in-law Sukchain Singh on account of insufficiency of dowry, brought by her Birpal Karu used to be beaten and was pressed to bring scooter from her parents or get the will of land situated at village Nangal Khurd obtained in their favour Sukhwinder Singh, husband of Birpal Kaur supported his wife but rest of the accused used to beat her Sukhwinder Singh and Birpal Kaur were turned out of the house. They started residing in the house of brother of Nachhattar Singh which is jointly owned by Nachhattar Singh and his brother Harpreet Kaur and gone to the house of her parents and in her absence on 18.4.2001. Chintan Singh came to village Hari Garh in order to see her daughter and came to know that she had been murdered by her in laws.

(3.) None has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. I have heard the State counsel at length. The grounds taken in the petition for seeking bail have been taken into consideration. The bail has been sought by the petitioner mainly on the ground that no specific allegation has been levelled against the petitioner and on the basis of the general allegation against the petitioner and other accused, his involvement in the commission of crime is not spelled out. Additionally, it was stated that poisonous substance was administered to deceased Birpal Kaur not in his house.