CRM-21476-2021

1. Vide this application, an order passed by this Court on 28.6.2021 in CRM-M-18138-2021 is sought to place on record, by which the wife of the present petitioner, i.e. the mother-in-law of the deceased, was admitted to bail by this Court.

2. It also seeks to place on record a copy of a disclosure statement stated to have been made by the son of the petitioner, i.e. the husband of the deceased, to the effect that the deceased had hanged herself, after which he (Pushpinder Singh, husband), had ‘brought her down’ by cutting the cloth with which she is alleged to have committed suicide (as per the husband).

3. Notice in the application.

4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab accepts notice.

5. The aforesaid documents simply being what they are, the application is allowed subject to all just exceptions and they are taken on record as Annexures P-11 and P-10 respectively, with the accompanying petition.

CRM-21478-2021

6. This application is rendered infrcutuous as the date of hearing in the accompanying petition is today itself. Disposed of as such.

CRM-M-3656-2021

7. The short reply filed by the respondent/State, dated 31.3.2021, is ordered to be taken on record.

8. As per the said reply, there are specific allegations against the petitioner and other co-accused for committing the murder of Swaranjit Kaur in collusion with each other, and therefore dismisal of this petition is sought.

9. A perusal of the order passed in the case of the wife of the present petitioner, shows that it had been contended before this Court that the daughter-in-law of the petitioner was habitual of taking a particular tablet on account of epileptic fits, and that one of the side effects of long use of that medicine was a tendency to commit suicide. It was also contended in that petition that it is actually the petitioner’s son who is alleged to have stangulated her, though the case of the accused was that she had committed suicide by hanging herself with a ‘dupatta’. Other than that, she was admitted to bail on the ground that she was a 74 year old lady (with that fact having been taken into consideration along with the other contentions raised).

10. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner (father-in-law of the deceased) is also 76 years old and has been in custody since 11.9.2020, i.e. for slightly over 11 months, with only 2 prosecution witnesses have been examined out of 21.

11. That being so, without making any comment on the actual merits of the case, as the prime allegation is against the husband of the deceased, simply looking at this stage at the age of the petitioner, the stage of the trial and the period of his custody, the petition is allowed. He be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned.