IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.6530 of 2025 Date of Decision: 12.05.2025 Reserved on: 01.05.2025 Balbir Kaur ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Himani Arora, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State. Mr. Sarbjit Singh Grewal, Advocate, for the complainant. *** MANISHA BATRA , J. 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”) seeking regular bail in the FIR mentioned below:- FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 78 08.07.2024 Maur, District Bathinda 103, 3(5), 304 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNS”) 2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a statement recorded by the complainant Sukhpal Singh alleging that on 07.07.2024 at about 7 PM, he was present at truck union and on hearing MANJU 2025.05.13 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.6530 of 2025 -2- some noises, he came out and saw that the accued Harpreet Singh, Jaspreet Singh and Gurdeep Singh who were armed with weapons were extended beatings to his brother Jaspal Singh by extending injuries with gandasa and his brother was found lying in front of liquor vend on the main road. He raised clamour on hearing which the assailants fled from the spot. The injured was rushed to Civil Hospital, Bathinda who succumbed to his injuries. While alleging that the aforementioned assailants by hatching a conspiracy with the present petitioner, her daughter Ekampreet Kaur and co- accused Gagandeep Singh had committed murder of his brother, he prayed for taking action in the matter. The motive attributed to the petitioner was that in the year 2020, Amrinder Singh son of petitioner was murdered and the victim Jaspal Singh and the complainant himself were named as assailants. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The petitioner was arrested on 08.07.2024. She suffered disclosure statement admitting her involvement in the crime and about instigating the co-accused for committing murder of the victim. The co-accused were also arrested and presently, the petitioner along with the co-accused is facing trial for commission of aforementioied offences. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that she has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no direct evidence to connect her with the murder of the victim. The case against her is based on circumstantial evidence. Her daughter Ekampreet Kaur and son-in-law Gagandeep Singh were found to be innocent during investigation. No MANJU 2025.05.13 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.6530 of 2025 -3- specific overt act of facilitating the assailants has been attributed to her. She was not present at the spot at the time of occurrence. She had no direct or indirect concern with the assailants Jaspreet Singh and Harpreet Singh. The co-accused Gurdeep Singh who was the only person in contact with the petitioner, being her driver, was not present at the spot and no specific role has been attributed to him. The trial will take sufficient time to conclude. The ingredients for commission of offence of criminal conspiracy have not been attracted qua her at all as there is no material on record to show so. She has clean antecedents. She is a widow and old aged person who is herself a victim at the hands of the complainant party as her son was murdered by them. Her further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. Accordingly, it is urged that she deserves to be released on bail. 4. Status report has already been filed. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that there are specific and serious allegations against the petitioner. She had motive to eliminate the victim. The allegations make out a prima facie case qua her involvement in the subject crime. The co-accused have also suffered disclosure statement disclosing her involvement in the case by hatching a conspiracy. There is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. It is, accordingly, argued that keeping in view the nature of the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, she does not deserve to be extended benefit of release on bail. 5. This Court has considered the rival submissions. MANJU 2025.05.13 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.6530 of 2025 -4- 6. The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the co-accused who in pursuance thereof had caused homicidal death of the victim by assaulting him and causing fatal injuries to him. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in natue. It is only on analyzing the evidence produced during the course of trial, that any conclusive finding as to innocene or otherwise of the petitioner can be given. Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances but without meaning to make any comment on the merits thereof, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. (MANISHA BATRA) 12.05.2025 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANJU 2025.05.13 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh