226 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 15.01.2026 SANDEEP SINGH ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

****

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL)

1. Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.47, dated 26.02.2024, under Sections 302, 328, 34 of IPC, registered at Police Station City Ratia, District Fatehabad.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case is that the FIR was lodged on the statement of the complainant, namely, Makhan Singh. It was alleged that his sister Rani Devi-deceased was married to Vikramjeet Singh. There was matrimonial dispute going on between them. Hence, Vikramjeet Singh started leaving separately from her. However, from about last 5-6 months, he joined the company of his wife and children. On 26.02.2024, he received a call from his brother-in-law, namely, Vikramjeet Singh that his sister had been killed and her dead body is lying in the house. On receiving the information, he reached the matrimonial house of his sister and found her lying dead. He found that there were marks of injuries on the face and neck of his sister and brother-in-law was also present. His niece, namely, Amandeep Kaur, Puja and nephew, Maninder Singh @ Mani were vomiting. It was suspected that someone had administered some poison substances to them, and, his sister has been killed by brick blows. The request was made to take legal action against the accused persons. On the registration of the FIR, investigation commenced. During investigation, on 28.02.2024, the supplementary statement of the complainant, namely, Makhan Singh has been recorded who deposed that his niece, namely, Amandeep Kaur has made an extra judicial confession that she in connivance with her boyfriend, namely, Sandeep Kumar (present petitioner) administered sleeping pills in the tea to her mother and her brothers and sisters. Thereafter, they fell unconscious, and thereafter, were given brick blows on her face and head. When she and her boyfriend were talking inside the bathroom of the house, her mother came there and started speaking loudly to them. Thus, they killed Rani Devi. On the basis of the same, the petitioner was arrayed as an accused and he was arrested on 28.02.2024. On completion of the investigation, the challan was presented. On framing of charges, trial commenced. He approached the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad for grant of bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad declined the bail application vide order dated 19.03.2025. Thus, the petitioner is before this Court praying for the grant of bail by way of filing the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner and whole family has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the petitioner is neither related to the family of the deceased nor he has any concern with them, however, he has been implicated in the present case on the basis of presumptions and assumptions. He further submits that the case of the prosecution is totally based on the circumstantial evidences. It is alleged that it is extra judicial confession made by Amandeep Kaur, daughter of the deceased before the complainant on the basis of which the petitioner has been roped in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner had not made extra judicial confession and the extra judicial confession made by the co-accused is not even admissible evidence. He further submits that the complainant has been examined before the trial Court as PW-5 and he has not supported the case of the prosecution and thus, he was declared hostile. He further submits besides the alleged extra judicial confession, the prosecution has no other evidence for the