Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kamaldeep Kaur Alias Raj Kaur vs State Of Punjab on 3 October, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:131303
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
215 CRM-M M No.48594 of 2024
Date of decision: 03.10.2024
KAMALDEEP KAUR ALIAS RAJ KAUR .... Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
Mr. Nishan Singh Chahal,, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr
Present :
Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab
Punjab.
****
MANISHA BATRA,
BATRA J. (oral)
1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of Bhar
Bharatiya
tiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), is for grant of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.47 dated 14.07.2024 registered under
Sections 458, 323, 148, 149 and 120-B
120 B of IPC at Police Station Phul, District
Bathinda. Offence under Section 325 of IPC has been added later on vide DDR
No.40 dated 25.07.2024.
25.07.2024
2. Vide order dated 27.09.2024,
2 .2024, passed by this Court, the petitioner
was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. Order dated
27.09.2024,
.2024, passed by this Court, reads as under:
“The
The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short
short-‘BNSS),
‘BNSS), 2023
seeking grant of anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.47
dated 14.07.2024 registered under Sections 458, 323, 148, 149
and 120-B
120 B of IPC at Police Station Phul, District Bathinda.
Offence under Section 325 of IPC has been added later on vide
DDR No.40 dated 25.07.2024.
The factual matrix of the case in brief is that on
29.06.2024, on receipt of ruqa from the civil hospital regarding
admission of Gurdip Singh and his wife Kuldeep Kaur therein in1 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 03-11-2024 21:20:19 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:131303CRM-M
M No.48594 of 2024 – 2-an injured condition due to sustaining injuries in some
altercation, a Police party reached there and obtained opinion of
doctor regarding condition of the injured. The injured Kuldeep
Kaur was opined unfit to record any statement. Then on
01.07.2024, opinion of doctor regarding the condition of injured
Gurdip Singh had been obtained and he too was opined to be unfit
for this purpose. The injured Gurdip Singh ultimately, recorded
his statement on 05.07.2024, alleging therein that on 28.06.2024,
his daughter-in-law
daughter law Sukhraj Kaur was beating her minor son and
when the complainant refrained her from doing so, she started
quarrelling with him and while hurling abuses, tore off his
clothing. His wife Kuldeep Kaur intervened and then Sukhraj
Kaur made a call to her family members thereby asking them to
reach at her matrimonial house and to teach a lesson to the
complainant and his wife. To avoid any confrontation, the
complainant and his wife went to sleep in their second house
situated outside in the vicinity of the village. On the same night,
on hearing some noises, he came out of his room and saw, Jagvir
Singh @ Jaggu brother of Sukhraj Kaur entering inside his house
after scaling
scaling over the gate. He was holding a Takua in his hand.
He opened the main gate thereby, facilitating entry of the
petitioner who is sister of Sukhraj Kaur and other accused
namely, Vakil Singh and Charanjit Singh @ Channa who were
accompanying 5-6
5 unknown persons and while hurling abuses to
him, opened an assault upon the complainant and caused injuries
with the weapons which they were carrying in their hands. The
petitioner, Sukhraj Kaur, Charanjit Singh @ Channa extended
beatings to his wife Kuldeep Kaur
Kaur.. They raised rescue alarm and
then the assailants fled away. The wife of the complainant called
Jassa Singh who is their son and then they were taken to the
hospital. He stated that his wife was not in a condition to record
statement and he too, was operated
operated on his leg and arm and was
discharged from the hospital only on 08.07.2024. He also2 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 03-11-2024 21:20:19 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:131303CRM-M
M No.48594 of 2024 – 3-disclosed that since there were talks about a compromise between
the parties, therefore, the matter could not be reported to the
Police earlier. On the basis of his sta
statement,
tement, the aforementioned
FIR was registered. Investigation proceedings have been initiated
and are under way. Apprehending her arrest, the petitioner had
moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which had
been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Bathinda vide order dated 23.07.2024.
It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that
she has been falsely implicated in this case. There is delay of 16
days in registration of the FIR which has been utilized by the
complainant for concocting a false and fabricated story. It is case
complainant
of version and cross version. Sukhraj Kaur who is the sister of the
petitioner, had already lodged a complaint with the Police and a
DDR No.28 dated 03.07.2024 was registered. The FIR of this case
was a counter blast to the said complaint. No grievous injury has
been attributed to the petitioner. Neither any specific overt act has
been attributed to her. The prosecution story is highly improbable
and unnatural. She has no motive to commit the aalleged
lleged crime. In
fact, on the fateful night, the complainant along with two unknown
persons, had visited the house of Sukhraj Kaur. They were under
the influence of liquor and had hurled abuses to Sukhraj Kaur.
Her clothing was torn off and she was extende
extended
d beatings. The wife
of the complainant was not at home at that time, however, when
she came back, Sukhraj Kaur had informed about the incident to
her, then instead of supporting her, she along with the
complainant had caused injuries to her. Sukhraj Kaur had
disclosed about this incident to her family members and on
hearing so, the petitioner along with her other family members
had come to the house of Sukhraj Kaur. The complainant and his
wife were not even present at home. Sukhraj Kaur was admitted to
thee hospital and was given treatment. The matter was reported to
the Police, though no case was registered. It is further submitted3 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 03-11-2024 21:20:19 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:131303CRM-M
M No.48594 of 2024 – 4-that the petitioner has permanent abode and there are no chances
of her absconding. She is a married woman with a five years oold
ld
son. She is ready to join the investigation. Her custodial
interrogation is not required. Therefore, it is urged that the
petitioner deserves to be extended benefit of pre arrest bail.
Notice of motion.
Learned State counsel who has appeared on advance
notice of the petition, submits that there are serious allegations
against the petitioner and therefore, she does not deserve to be
extended benefit of pre-arrest
pre arrest bail.
Adjourned to 03.10.2024.
In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to appear
before the Investigating/Arresting Officer to join investigation
within one week or as and when subsequently required thereafter.
In the event of her arrest, the Investigating/Arresting Officer shall
release
lease the petitioner on ad-interim
ad interim bail subject to his/her
satisfaction. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as
envisaged under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.”
2023
3. Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating
Officer, has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation on
01.10.2024
.2024 and he is not required for custodial interrogation.
4. Keeping in view the above mentioned facts and circumstances,
without commenting on the merits
merits of the case, the present petition is allowed
and the order dated 03.10.2024,
.2024, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made
absolute, subject to compliance of terms and conditions requisite for grant of
anticipatory bail.
(MANISHA BATRA)
03.10.2024 JUDGE
Jyoti-IV
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No.
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 03-11-2024 21:20:19 :::