241 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-45562-2025 Date of decision : 03.11.2025 Kajal .....Petitioner versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present :- Ms. Mehak Sawhney, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Diya Sodhi, Senior DAG, Haryana.

RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present second petition praying for grant of regular bail to her in case FIR No.0053 dated 09.02.2024, under Sections 302/34 of IPC (Section 34 dropped and 120-B, 201, 392 and 397 of IPC, introduced in the final report), registered at Police Station Civil Lines Kaithal, District Kaithal.

2. Succinctly, facts of the case are that the FIR in the present case was lodged on the statement of complainant Naresh @ Sunita wife of Satish on 09.02.2024. It was alleged that her husband Satish was approximately of the age of 45 years and was running his own plastic granule manufacturing factory from the last about 05 years. 3-4 workers used to work in the factory. On 08.02.2024 at about 9:00 PM, she spoke to her husband Satish who informed her that he had taken tea and was feeling nausea. Ankit and his wife Kajal (petitioner) also worked in the factory. Ajay and Kajal told her that Satish had taken medicine and tonight he would sleep in the factory itself. Later on, she found the phone of her husband to be switched off. In the morning at about 06:00 AM, she tried to contact her husband however, again found his phone as switched off. Later on, the police came to her house and informed that her husband died in the factory. On reaching the factory, she saw the body of her husband lying on the cot. She suspected Ankit, Ajay and Kajal to be the persons who murdered her husband. They had also taken away the DVR of the CCTV cameras installed in the factory and her husband mobile phone was also found to be missing. Request was made to take legal action against the accused. On registration of the FIR, investigation commenced. During investigation, the supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded on 10.02.2024 wherein it was alleged that the petitioner though used to work in the factory, however, a month prior to the occurrence, she left the job from the factory. Petitioner was arrested on 15.02.2024. On completion of the investigation, challan was presented. On framing of the charges, the trial commenced. Petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal praying for grant of regular bail. However, after hearing counsel for both the sides, the same was declined vide order dated 16.01.2025. Being aggrieved, petitioner earlier approached this Court by way of filing CRM-M-8819-2025 for grant of regular bail however, the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 08.04.2025. Hence, this is the second petition filed by the petitioner praying for grant of regular bail.

3. It has been vehemently contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. She submits that Ankit (husband of the petitioner) is co-accused in the present case and the petitioner being the wife of Ankit has been falsely implicated. She also submits that false implication upon the petitioner is evident from the fact that in the initial version when the FIR was registered, petitioner was alleged to be along with co-accused in the alleged murder of Satish however in the supplementary statement recorded on 10.02.2024, it was stated by the complainant herself that petitioner had already left the job of the factory a month prior to the occurrence. She thus, submits that the petitioner had never participated in the alleged occurrence as per the case of the prosecution and hence, the only allegation against her is that she was part of the conspiracy hatched with. She submits that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of her arrest and presently, she is living in the jail along with two minor c