High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Reshma vs State Of Haryana on 25 February, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Reshma vs State Of Haryana on 25 February, 2009
     In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

                      Criminal Misc. No.M-1311 of 2009
                      Date of decision: 25.2.2009

Reshma                                              ......Petitioner
                      Versus

State of Haryana                                 .......Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

Present:   Mr.Vivek Khatri, Advocate,
           for the petitioner.

           Mr.Sidharth Sarup, AAG, Haryana.
                      ****

SABINA, J.

This petition has been filed by Reshma under Section 439

of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail in case

FIR No. 241 dated 23.7.2007, under Sections 302/120-B/34 of the

Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Tohana, District

Fatehabad.

As per the prosecution case, Geeta (deceased), daughter

of the complainant, wanted to reside separately from her in-laws but

her father-in-law Hazoor Singh, mother-in-law Reshma, husband Hari

Chand and brother-in-law Vinod did not want Geeta and Hari Chand

to reside separately. Due to this reason a dispute arose between

them. On 22.7.2007 complainant received a phone call from Vinod

and Hazoor Singh at about 10.30 p.m. that the complainant should

advice his daughter otherwise they would do whatever they could.

Complainant went to the house of his daughter on 23.7.2007 at 1.00

a.m. and saw that petitioner-Reshma was sitting on the stairs.

Complainant, after inquiring from her, went inside the room and saw

that his daughter was lying dead on the bed. When the complainant
Criminal Misc. No.M-1311 of 2009 -2-

came outside he found that petitioner-Reshma had left the spot.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner is an old lady aged about 65 years. Marriage between

Geeta and Hari Chand was solemnized about 7 ½ years prior to the

occurrence. Geeta was residing separately with her husband since

the year 2005. The death of Geeta had not occurred due to

strangulation.

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted

that as per the postmortem report, the death of Geeta had occurred

due to strangulation. Ten witnesses had already been examined

during trial and now only 2-3 witnesses remained to be examined as

5-6 witnesses had been given up during trial. Now the next date

fixed before the trial Court is 3.3.2009.

The allegations levelled against the petitioner in the

present case are serious in nature. The petitioner was sitting on the

stairs when the complainant reached the spot. The complainant

went inside the room and saw that his daughter was lying dead on

the bed and when he came out of the room, he found that the

petitioner had left the spot. As per the postmortem report probable

cause of death in this case was due to strangulation, which was

sufficient to cause death in the normal course of life.

Keeping in view the seriousness of offence alleged to

have been committed by the petitioner and the fact that the trial is

almost near completion, this petition is dismissed.




                                                (SABINA)
February 25, 2009                                JUDGE
anita