The court granted interim bail based on the lack of recovered evidence and the weight of suicide notes, emphasizing the need for corroborative proof in serious accusations pending further investigation.

JUDGMENT :

Anoop Chitkara, J.

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [ BNSS ], seeking anticipatory bail.

2. In paragraph 17 of the bail petition, the accused declares that she has no criminal antecedents.

3. The facts and allegations are taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows:

“1. That it is respectfully submitted here that an FIR No. 412 dated 15.09.2024 has been registered on the basis of the statement of the complainant namely Karam Singh, in which he broadly stated that the marriage of his son namely Jaswinder Singh was solemnized about 18 years ago with Jyoti/the Petitioner. His son had one son namely Fath Singh, aged about 12 years. His son was 50% disabled due to injuries caused to him in a road accident. His daughter-in-law/the Petitioner had started raising dispute and was pressurizing them to sell the property. Hence the complainant had sold all his properties and divided equally among his two sons as per their respective shares. The complainant further stated that his daughter-in-law/the Petitioner had forcibly transferred all of the properties in her name which was owned and purchased by his son. The complainant further stated that his daughter-in-law/the Petitioner was having an extra-marital affair with one person namely Nishan Singh resident of Amritsar. His daughter-in-law/the Petitioner and Nishan Singh had declared themselves as husband and wife among neighbours at Mohali. The complainant further stated that his Daughter-in-law Jyoti/the Petitioner in connivance with Nishani Singh, Resham Singh @ Sukhdev Singh resident of Amritsar had kidnapped his son and had kept him at some unknown place in order to usurp his property and money. The complainant further stated that his son had come to meet his at village Dyalpur in January 2024. Thereafter, he did not have any talk with his son nor he had met him. The complainant apprehended danger to the life of his son and sought legal action against his Daughter-in-law namely Jyoti/the Petitioner, Nishan Singh and Resham Singh @ Sukhdev Singh. As the statement prima facie disclosed commission of cognizable offence, hence FIR No. 412 dated 15.09.2024 has been registered under section 365, 34 IPC against Jyoti/the Petitioner, Nishan Singh and Resham Singh @ Sukhdev Singh.”

4. Counsel for the petitioner seeks bail on the grounds of false implication by the petitioner’s father-in-law. He argued that the only evidence that the prosecution has collected against the petitioner is based on an extrajudicial confession made by co-accused Nishant Singh and Resham Singh recorded on 21.09.2024. However, such confessions of co-accused have no legal value. He refers to suicide note as Annexures P-6 and translation of video recorded by deceased as Annexure P-7, which were purportedly made by the petitioner’s husband, who is stated to have been murdered.

5. The petitioner’s counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and her family.

6. The State’s counsel as well as counsel for the complainant opposes bail and refers to the status report. Counsel for the complainant submits that corpus of delicti has not been recovered so far, in case the same is recovered in that case