KULWINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal has been filed under Sec. 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'SC/ST Act') for grant of regular bail to the appellant in case bearing FIR No.361 dtd. 17/9/2023, registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 302, 34, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and Sec. 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, at Police Station Sohana, District Mohali.

(2.) The gravamen of the allegations against the appellant is that the complainant, namely, Surinder Singh (father of the deceased), had stated in his statement on 17/9/2023 at 03:02 hours, that on 12/9/2023, his son, namely Satvir Singh (deceased) had gone for his work being driver of a Taxi bearing No.PB-01D-3332, but did not return home back; accordingly, a missing report was lodged in PS, IT City, vide DDR No.28. Later on, a supplementary statement was also recorded. Further, one car was pulled out of the canal, and it was discovered that the deceased was having injuries on his head, throat and other parts of the body; one kirpan iron rod fitted with cycle garai and two wrecked mobile phones were also recovered from the said car raising suspicion against unknown persons. Later on, the appellant was named in the case.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has iterated that the appellant is in custody since 17/9/2023. Learned counsel has further iterated that the appellant has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further iterated that the case in hand is not one of the eye witness account, but of circumstantial evidence. Learned counsel has argued that prosecution version primarily based upon the statements of Dharminder Singh and Ajaib Singh, who are stated to have witnessed the deceased being taken in the car in question on 12/9/2023, but they have not chosen to report to the police till 17/9/2023. Learned counsel has iterated that thus, the entire prosecution case accordingly, becomes doubtful. Learned counsel has argued that there are total 28 prosecution witnesses and only 03 have been examined till date. Learned counsel has argued that the appellant is a lady and has clean antecedents. Learned counsel has further argued that the appellant has suffered incarceration of more than 011/2 years. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.