218 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-9512-2026 Date of Decision:- 23.03.2026 Dharam Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM:-HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. Gaurav Kalsi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, Punjab.

****

AMARJOT BHATTI, J.(Oral)

1. Petitioner – Dharam Singh has filed 2^nd petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 64 dated 10.06.2024 under Section 304-B IPC registered at Police Station Shahpurkandi, District Pathankot.

2. As per the facts of case, complainant Tarsem Lal gave his statement that his daughter Madhu Bala got married with Dharam Singh about two and a half years ago. She lived happily in matrimonial home for about six months and thereafter, quarrel started in matrimonial home on account of demand for dowry raised by her husband and in-laws. She was harassed and beaten up. About 5-6 days earlier, his daughter was beaten up and she was brought back in parental house along with her son. A Panchayat was convened and after making her husband understand, she was sent to her matrimonial home on 09.06.2024. On the next day i.e. 10.06.2024, at about 05:00 am, Dharam Singh told on phone that Madhu Bala was not waking up from her bed and he did not know as to what had happened to her. He along with his family members reached her daughter’s matrimonial home and saw that there were marks of injury on the body of his daughter. She was being taken to Civil Hospital, Pathankot after making arrangement of conveyance and in the midway, they stopped at J.K. Hospital, Jugyal for checkup and doctor declared her dead. Dead body was taken to Civil Hospital, Pathankot. Complainant suspected that his daughter was killed by her husband Dharam Singh by beating her and administering some poisonous substance. With these allegations, present FIR has been registered.

3. Learned counsel representing petitioner argued that allegations against petitioner are false and without any basis. Prior to this, there was no complaint against him. Even property was being purchased in her name. Copy of sale deed is Annexure P-2. Petitioner was arrested in this case on 10.06.2024 and since then he is behind the bars. His regular bail application was wrongly declined vide order dated 22.07.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pathankot (Annexure P-6). Earlier he had filed regular bail petition in this Court bearing CRM-M-12341-2025 which was withdrawn on dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure P-7). Learned counsel representing petitioner referred to statement of Dr. Raman Attri PW-5 (Annexure P-5) to point out that there was no injury on the body of deceased. Victim never died in matrimonial house, rather she was taken to private hospital where she was declared dead. Trial in this case may take long time. He cannot be kept behind the bars for indefinite time period.

Therefore, his second regular bail petition may be allowed.

4. Status report filed through Registry by respondent-State and same is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Bail petition is opposed by learned counsel representing State of Punjab. Copy of Postmortem Report of victim is Annexure R-1. In Postmortem Report, there is reference of bruise mark over left wrist joint. As per report of Chemical Examiner Laboratory (Annexure R-2), no poison was detected in exhibits tested in laboratory. As per opinion of doctor (Annexure R-3), cause of death in this case was Asphyxia due to strangulation which is sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Considering the gravity of offence, second regular bail petition filed by petitioner is opposed.

5. I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record carefully. In this case, after completion of investigation, challan is already presented and prosecution evidence is being recorded. After framing of charges on 19.03.2025, till date eight prosecution witnesses are alre