MANJU Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the first petition under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in FIR No.26 dtd. 21/7/2021, under Sec. 306 IPC, at Police Station GRP Gurugram.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is the 29 years old daughter-in-law of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that even a perusal of the alleged suicide note would show that no specific incident has been mentioned in the said suicide note that could implicate her in the present case and no overt act has been attributed to the petitioner. It is submitted that the version given in the FIR is beyond the allegations which have been made in the suicide note. It is further submitted that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and she is not involved in any other case. It is also stated that although, it is mentioned in the suicide note that the marriage had been performed between the petitioner and son of the deceased, six months prior to the date of the alleged suicide note and no complaint has ever been given against the petitioner by the deceased or by the complainant, alleging any kind of harassment. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 2/8/2021 and there are 19 prosecution witnesses, but none of them have been examined and the trial is likely to take time, moreso, in view of the present pandemic and thus, the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail.

(3.) Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the present petition for regular bail and has submitted that in the present petition, there is a suicide note written by the deceased, which held the present petitioner to be responsible for his commission of suicide.