214 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-3697-2025 Date of decision: 21.02.2025 Dalbir ...Petitioner(s)

versus State of Haryana ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI Present:- Mr. S. S. Gill, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Gagandeep Singh Chhina, AAG, Haryana.

****

J ASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (Oral)

1. The present is a third petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.273 dated 03.09.2023, under Sections 306 and 34 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Dadri Sadar, District Charkhi Dadri.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody for 1 year, 5 months and 16 days and out of total 17 cited prosecution witnesses 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined. He submitted that the allegations against the petitioner were that he used to give beatings to his wife, who is the deceased. He further submitted that the offence under Section 306 IPC was not made out and the sister of the deceased has also not been examined till date and therefore, the petitioner may be considered for the grant of regular bail.

3. On the other hand, Mr. Gagandeep Singh Chhina, AAG, Haryana has opposed the grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that it is a case where although the petitioner is in custody for 1 year, 5 months and 16 days but the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and considering the gravity of the offence, he may not be considered for the grant of regular bail and there is a likelihood that in case the petitioner is released on bail, then he may abscond from justice. He submitted that at the time of deposition, the prosecution witnesses have supported the prosecution case and as per the allegations, the petitioner got married to the deceased in the year 2007 and he was accused of questioning the character of the deceased and he used to make dirty allegations against the deceased and other allegations against the petitioner are that he alongwith the other co-accused used to give beatings to the deceased and thereafter, she consumed poisonous spray from the bottle kept at home during night and she died. He further submitted that considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail.

4. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

5. It is a case where the petitioner is in custody for 1 year, 5 months and 16 days. The allegations against the petitioner were pertaining to use of dirty words against his wife, who is the deceased and also questioning her character and there have also been direct allegations of beating etc. against the petitioner and as per the FIR, the deceased, who was the wife of the petitioner consumed poisonous spray from the bottle kept at home at night and she died. The apprehension which has been expressed by learned State counsel that in case the petitioner is released on bail, then he may abscond from justice cannot be ignored and does carry weight. Apart from the above, the gravity and seriousness of the offence would disentitle the petitioner for grant of regular bail.

6. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed.

7. However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and is meant for the purpose of deciding the present petition only.

(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)

21.02.2025 JUDGE

rakesh