LAWS(P&H)-1995-9-66

SUDESH KUMARI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On September 21, 1995
SUDESH KUMARI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was neither named in the F.I.R. nor was she involved in this case in any way. The case against her is relied upon only on extrajudicial confession of one of the co-accused and even in that no role has been attributed. He further submits that the said statement was recorded after two months from the date of occurrence and as alleged by the prosecution 10 days after the arrest of the co-accused. He further submits that the petitioner is a young lady having a child of 7 months and she is in jail since July, 1995. Mr. Bhinder appearing for the State of Haryana submits that it is a case of circumstantial evidence. He has not been able to point out any definite role played by the petitioner even after hatching of the conspiracy, if any. However, accused has been charged under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The counsel for the petitioner also relied upon Smt. Bimla v. State of Haryana, where Justice Punchhi, (as his Lordship then was) held that Provison to Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure permits distinction in favour of women even if there appears to be a reasonable ground for believing that they have been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is a young mother and her husband stands incarcerated for the crime as an under trial it would be appropriate at least in the interest of her young children to release her on bail pending trial

(3.) In view of the aforementioned submission and without commenting upon the merit of the case and the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail subject to her furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount in the satisfaction of C.J.M./Duty Magistrate, Panipat. The petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of this Court without leave of that Court. Petition is disposed of. Order be given Dasti. Petition allowed.