IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-31882 of 2008
Date of Decision:- 10.3.2009
Gurmukh Singh Versus State of Punjab.
Present:- Ms. Monika Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Rajni Gupta, DAG, Punjab.
M.M.S.BEDI. (J) (Oral)
Petitioner along with his mother and father had maltreated
Bhinder Kaur @ Sarbjeet Kaur and compelled her to bring more dowry.
She was persuaded to bring scooter, T.V, C.D player, etc., from her parents
but still the family members of the petitioner were not satisfy. On 3.4.2007
a sum of Rs.10,000/- was demanded by Bhinder Kaur from her family as
such she finished her life having been fed-up with the demands of the
petitioner and his family members for dowry.
It has been, inter alia, argued that petitioner has been in custody
since 5.4.2007 and only five witnesses have been examined. The trial is
likely to take some more time.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. In the present case
there are allegations of demand of dowry. Sarabjit Kaur had died of an
unnatural death within seven years of her marriage. There is prima facie
allegations of cruelty soon before the death. A presumption of Section 113-
B of Evidence Act appears to be applicable in the present case, deceased
having committed suicide fed-up with the demand of dowry.
In view of above said statutory presumption, it will be required
that all the accused to rebut the same in case the necessary ingredients are
established by the prosecution. No ground is made out for grant of bail.
Crl. Misc. No. M-31882 of 2008 -2-
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, has brought to
the notice of this Court that charges were framed in this case on 10.9.2007.
There are about 16 prosecution witnesses. Out of the said witnesses only 3-
4 witnesses have been examined. The material witness i.e the brother of the
deceased is intentionally avoiding appearance to delay the proceedings. The
petitioner has been in custody for the last about two years.
In view of the said circumstances, it is deemed appropriate, in the
interest of justice to give a direction to the trial Court to complete the trial
within a period of six months after the receipt of copy of this order. In case
the trial could not be concluded within the said time framed, it will be open
to the petitioner to approach this Court again for the grant of bail. Above
said order will not prejudice the legal rights of the petitioner.
Disposed of.
March 10, 2009 (M.M.S.Bedi) tripti Judge