Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2733 (PNJ)

Paramjit v. State Of Haryana

2019-10-04

GURVINDER SINGH GILL

body2019
JUDGMENT : Gurvinder Singh Gill, J. 1. Paramjit wife of Sandeep Kumar seeks grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered against her vide FIR No.110 dated 3.9.2019 under Sections 306/376/370/328/366/385/341/216/406/120-B IPC at Police Station Jathlana, District Yamuna Nagar. 2. The FIR was registered at the instance of Rajesh Kumar wherein it has been alleged that his daughter Neha was married to Dalip Kumar in the year 2016. Her daughter was, however, tortured by her mother-in-law and mother-in-law's sister for not being able to bear a child. Neha disclosed about the same to her friend in the village namely Surita @ Manu, who assured her that she would get her divorced and will also find a job for her. It is alleged that on 10.5.2019 Surita sent Neha to the Courts at Jagadhari along with Parduman and Manoj where they met Surinder and Rajesh who took Neha in a car and got her signatures affixed on some blank papers while stating her that the same were divorce papers. It is alleged that the said persons administered something in juice and gave the same to Neha at Jagadhari and while she was in a state of intoxication, she was taken to Baddi by Manoj where her photograph and video was prepared in an attempt to blackmail her. It is alleged that on 12.5.2019, Manoj took Neha to Lucknow via Delhi and Kanpur and established physical relations with her and started torturing Neha. It is alleged that on 25.7.2019, Manoj along with Neha reached Jagadhari railway station where they met Surinder @ Kala and Rajesh. It is alleged that Surinder @ Kala took them to the house of his relative in his car and later on 26.7.02019, statement of Neha was got recorded in the Court. It is alleged that later Neha disclosed to the complainant that her statement had been recorded under the pressure of her photographs. It is further alleged that on 26.7.2019, S.I. Chanderpal, Head Constable Nirmal Singh took them to Khajuri where she was taken to the house of Sanju. It is alleged that Sanju and his wife forced Neha into prostitution and also got her signatures forcibly on some blank papers. It is further alleged that on 26.7.2019, S.I. Chanderpal, Head Constable Nirmal Singh took them to Khajuri where she was taken to the house of Sanju. It is alleged that Sanju and his wife forced Neha into prostitution and also got her signatures forcibly on some blank papers. Later on, the victim managed to reach the office of Superintendent of Police on 13.8.2019 and submitted a written representation and that her statement was also recorded in the presence of women police on 19.8.2019. It is alleged that on 2.9.2019 when complainant's daughter Neha visited the police station in reference to her representation, she was very upset and having been tortured by Manoj Kumar, Surinder @ Kala, Rajesh, Parduman, Surita @ Manu, Sanju and Paramjit, she consumed some intoxicating substance resulting in her death. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that she has falsely been implicated in the present case and that even as per the FIR, there is hardly any allegation against the petitioner in either having abducted her or having forced her into prostitution and that it is in the last para of the FIR that the complainant has made sweeping allegations against a large number of accused including the present petitioner. The learned counsel has further submitted that it is a case where Neha who was infact married to Dalip Kumar had started residing with Manoj in a live-in relationship and had virtually severed all her relations with her husband Manoj, as has also been deposed in her affidavit (Annexure P-2) which was duly executed in the presence of the present petitioner. 4. Opposing the petition, the learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. 5. I have considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court. A perusal of FIR, does not disclose that there is any such act or conduct on part of the petitioner from which it can be said that she had abetted in the commission of suicide by the deceased who had allegedly committed suicide while in police station. In these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the present case is not such a case which would warrant custodial interrogation of the petitioner. 6. In these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the present case is not such a case which would warrant custodial interrogation of the petitioner. 6. The petition, as such, is accepted that the petitioner in the event of her arrest shall be released on interim bail subject to her furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Arresting/Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.