CRM-M No. 32032 of 2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (218) CRM-M No. 32032 of 2025 Date of Decision : 03.09.2025 Paramjit Kaur ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present: Mr. Nitin Mittoo, Advocate with Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. *** Subhas Mehla, J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.126 dated 12.09.2020 registered under Sections 302, 120-B of IPC, at Police Station Jhander, Amritsar. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was married to Randeep Singh @ Romy (deceased) and Jagdeep Singh, brother of the deceased has falsely involved the petitioner in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was having a matrimonial dispute with her husband-Randeep Singh @ Romy (deceased). Due to the said grudge, the complainant has falsely named the petitioner and other accused in the FIR in the present case. Learned counsel further contends that even during the course of investigation, the police could not collect any incriminating evidence against the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 25.08.2022 and thus, she is in custody for the last more KANCHAN 2025.09.08 15:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CRM-M No. 32032 of 2025 2 than 3 years. He further contends that the co-accused, namely, Harmeet Kaur and Gagandeep Singh alias Sonu have already been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 29.02.2024 passed in CRM-M-27729-2023 and order dated 16.09.2024 passed in CRM-M-33173-2024 hence, the case of the petitioner is at par with them. Learned counsel further submits that the trial Court will take time to conclude the trial as out of 25 prosecution witnesses, only 12 witnesses have been examined. 3. Learned State counsel has produced custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which is taken on record. Learned State counsel has not disputed that the case of the present petitioner is on same footing as of co-accused, namely, Harmeet Kaur and Gagandeep Singh alias Sonu, who have been granted bail by this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. No doubt, very serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner, however, this Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that the petitioner has already undergone more than 3 years of actual custody in the present case. Apart from that, the complainant-Jagdeep Singh and other material/private witnesses have been recorded by the Trial Court and there are no chances of tampering with the prosecution evidence. Still further, there is no material on record to indicate that the petitioner is in a position to influence the official witnesses or may flee from the process of justice. Even otherwise, Harmeet Kaur and Gagandeep Singh alias Sonu, co-accused have already been admitted to bail by this Court vide orders Annexures P-3 and P- 4. KANCHAN 2025.09.08 15:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CRM-M No. 32032 of 2025 3 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned. September 03, 2025 (SUBHAS MEHLA) kanchan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No KANCHAN 2025.09.08 15:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment