18.08.202 Jatinder Sin der Singh alias Mannu & Anr v. CORAM: AM: HON'BLE
Case Details
CRM-M-211 21199-2025 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN IN AT CHANDIG F PUNJAB AND HARYANA NDIGARH 230 2025 CRM-M-21199-2025 2025 Decided on : 18.08.202 Jatinder Sin der Singh alias Mannu & Anr . . . Petitioner(s ioner(s) State of Pun of Punjab . . . Respondent( ndent(s) ersus Versus CORAM: AM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SA CE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: SENT: Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocat for the petitioner(s). vocate Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, ullar, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advoca dvocate for the complainant. SANJAY V JAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) **** 1. The instant petition has been f been filed under Section 483 of BNS f BNSS, 2023 (earli (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for gra or grant of regular bail to the petition etitioner No.1-Jatind Jatinder Singh alias Mannu aged r No.2- aged 24 years and petitioner No.2 Mansimran simran Singh alias Simmu aged 25 ye 25 years, during the pendency of tria of trial, who have have been booked in a criminal case
Legal Reasoning
al case arising out of First Informatio rmation Report, as d rt, as detailed here-under:- Name Name of titioner(s) Petition 1. Jatind Jatinder Singh alias Mannu alias 2. Mans Mansimran Singh Singh alias Simmu Simm Date Section(s) Secti FIR No. 165 27.07.2024 304 and 1 (Section 307 IPC a 4 and 120-B IPC ection 302 and IPC added later Police Station Sadar Amritsar on) District Police Commissioner sionerate itsar, Amritsar, trict District itsar. Amritsar. SUMIT SINGLA 2025.08.19 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-211 21199-2025 - 2 - 2. Counsel for the petitione titioner contends that complaina plainant Lakhwinde winder Kaur, related as being victim h ictim herself and also related as moth mother of the dece e deceased-Prince Chauhan alleged t eged that her daughter-in-law Navdee avdeep Kaur wife wife of Prince Chauhan wanted to ted to learn astrology and thereon sh eon she developed loped some relations with Pandit Var it Varun. On 11.06.2024 around 11:0 d 11:00 AM, when when complainant was present in her in her house, Navdeep Kaur served foo ed food to her husb r husband-Prince Chauhan (deceased ceased in present case) along with on ith one glass of lem f lemonade to Prince Chauhan and n and also to her. Subsequently, Princ , Prince Chauhan di han died but the complainant in the pr the present case survived on account o count of some treatm treatment. 3. Both the petitioners herein ar rein are related as brother of the ma he main accused Na sed Navdeep Kaur and have been invo n involved in the case on the disclosu sclosure statement o ment of main accused Navdeep Kau p Kaur. Counsel further contends th nds that allegations ations attributed to the petitioner are r are that they had supplied poison i. ison i.e. mettle arsen Kaur. le arsenic to their sister Navdeep Kaur. 4. Counsel for the petitioners ners argues that initially though th ugh the petitioners ioners were challaned but on a of on account of conducting of the th supplement lementary investigation, were found in und innocent. Counsel also submits th its that none of the of the petitioners were present on th on the spot i.e. at the time of mixin mixing poison in t n in the lemonade. Also disclosure st sure statement of co-accused in fact fact, is not admiss dmissible piece of evidence as per la per law and the chances of convictio nviction only on tha on that basis, are very bleak. Counsel its further submits that allegation seemed th to be to b improbable ble, because petitioners are neithe neither in any manner connected wi ted with the issue issue of learning astrology nor eve or even interested remotely, if the if their SUMIT SINGLA 2025.08.19 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-211 21199-2025 - 3 - sister is hav r is having any interest in learning astro g astrology. 5. It was also pointed out that co that co-accused of the petitioner name namely Anju Meh Mehta alias Anju Bala (wife of e of Pandit Varun) was granted th ted the concession ession of anticipatory bail by this Cou is Court vide its order dated 19.02.202 02.2025 passed in C d in CRM-M-57845-2024 (Annexure exure P2). Petitioners are stated to be to be in custody sin since 06.10.2024 and it will be hea be heavily upon the prosecution to lea to lead the substan ubstantive evidence to prove the charg charges against them, only on the bas he basis of suspicio uspicion. Counsel argues that petitio petitioners cannot be indefinitely itely by curtailing t iling their personal liberty. Thus, pray s, prays for grant of regular bail to th il to the ioners. petitioners 6. On the other hand, learned arned State counsel submits custod custody certificate d ficate dated 16.08.2025. Learned Stat d State Counsel also being assisted b isted by counsel for sel for the complainant submitted tha ted that the petitioners are party to th y to the heinous cri us crime. 7. Amongst the victims, comp complainant Lakhwinder Kaur ha aur has survived bu ved but Prince Chauhan lost his life is life. It is a case of deep conspirac nspiracy which was h was hatched up by the wife of the f the deceased along with her brothe brothers i.e. petition etitioners herein. 8. On being asking of the Court, ourt, it has been submitted that charge charges have been f been framed but none of the prosecuti secution witnesses has been examined mined. 9. This Court has heard the subm e submissions advanced by counsel fo nsel for both the pa parties and on consideration of th n of the material available on record. ecord. It seems to b s to be admitted position that at the at the time of mixing of the allege alleged poison in t n in the lemonade, none of the peti e petitioners was present on the spo he spot. Whether po ther poison was ever supplied by the p y the petitioners or not or by their siste ir sister, SUMIT SINGLA 2025.08.19 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-211 21199-2025 - 4 - is yet to et to be established by the prosec prosecution by leading unimaginab aginable nce. evidence. The aspect of petitioners’ cul rs’ culpability and whether they share shared a common mon intention with others is yet to et to be determined by the trial Cour l Court, which wil h will require detailed appreciatio eciation of evidence. None of th of the prosecution cution witnesses is examined till dat ill date and petitioners are stated to b ed to be inside jail e jail since 06.10.2024. No other cas er case is registered against any of the petitioners. ioners. In view of the aforementioned tioned facts, this Court is of the opinio opinion that person personal liberty of the petitioners s should not be curtailed for a for an indefinite p inite period. 10. In such circumstances, continu ontinued incarceration of the petitione titioners would not d not serve any meaningful purpo purpose in aid of the prosecutio ecution. Accordingl rdingly, plea for grant of regular bai lar bail to the petitioners in the prese present case is acce is accepted. 11. Consequently, prayer made in ade in the present petition is allowe llowed. Petitioner ioners are ordered to be released on ed on bail, subject to his furnishin rnishing bail/surety surety bonds to the satisfaction of the of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judici Judicial Magistrate/ istrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magist Magistrate concerned, if not required uired in any other c ther case. 12. Needless to observe that the at the petitioners shall not extend an end any threat and s t and shall not influence any prosecuti secution witness in any manner direct directly or indirectl directly. 13. Any of the discussion done an one and recorded here above, shall n hall not be construe nstrued as an expression of opinion o nion on the facts of the case. Therefor efore, trial Court Court is expected to decide the case b case by taking an independent view, o iew, on SUMIT SINGLA 2025.08.19 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-211 21199-2025 - 5 - the basis o asis of evidence available on record, record, as expeditiously as possible, sible, in accordance rdance with law. 14.
Decision
Petition stands disposed of. 8.2025 18.08.2025 gla Sumit Singla (SANJAY VASHISTH JUDGE ISTH) Whether spe Whether Rep speaking/reasoned: Reportable: Yes/No Yes/No SUMIT SINGLA 2025.08.19 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document