Gurpreet Singh v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-29326-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-29326-2024 Reserved on: 01.08.2025 Pronounced on: 19.08.2025 Gurpreet Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Malkiat Singh Hundal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S.Thind, DAG, Punjab. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 128 20.11.2023 Sadar Ahmedgarh, 323/302/34 IPC (Section 302 Malerkotla IPC deleted and Section 304 IPC added later on) 1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above came before this Court under Section 439 CrPC seeking regular bail. 2. In paragraph 10 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents. 3. The facts and allegations are taken from the translated copy of the FIR attached to the bail petition, which reads as follows: “Statement of Raghvir Singh son of Mohinder Singh resident of village Naro Majra, polie station Sadar Ahmedgarh, District Malerkotla aged about 70 years mobile no: 62834-717221. Stated that I am resident of the above sadi address and beaing of old age I stay at home. I have one sone namely Gurpreet Singh who is married to Harpreet Kaur daughter of Dalip Singh resident of Cheema about 18 years ago and they have two sons namely Gursimran Singh aged about 17 years and Jaspal Singh aged about 15 years. Me and my wife Joginder Kaur use to live in house in one room and my son and his wife and their children use to live in house in other room. I have 22 bighas of land and out of which 14 bighas of land was given by panchayat of our village to solve the domestic dispute and I have 8 bighas of land which give on lease. My son Gurpreet and my daughter-in law Harpreet kaur use to harasses me and my wife Joginder Kaur and wanted to usurp my 8 bighas of land. As my wife Joginer Kaur use d to remain ill and she was being looked after by my 1 Jyoti Sharma 2025.08.19 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh CRM-M-29326-2024 only. That on 16.011.2023 at about 9 AM, after giving medicine to my wife Joginder Kaur, I was going outside when my son Gurpreet Singh sold me for lifting soil from his fields, on which I said to him that fields are already low on soit and we will not lift soil from fields. On which my son Gurpreet Singh asked me who I am to refuse him from doing so and he caught hold me of my hairs and my daughter in law Harpreet Kaur gave a stick blow on my hand and to save myself I raised hand and it hit on my right hand I raised hue and cry Maar ditta Maar ditta, on hearig which my both grandsons Gurvimran Singh and Jaspal Singh son of Gurpreet Singh also came there and started beating me. In meantime my wife Joginder Kaur, who was unable to walk, came there from her room while crawling so as to save me. All of them caught hold my wife Joginder Kaur and my daughter-in law Harpreet Kaur made my wife fall on floor by pushing her and when my wife Joginder Kaur was lying on floor, my son Gurpreet Singh, my daughter-in law Harpreet Kaur and both grandsons Gursimran Singh and Jaspal Singh gave her fist and kick blows to her and said that told we will end this daily depute and will not leave them alive. We both raise hue and cry Maar ditta Maar ditta, on which all of them went into their rooms leaving us in writhing in pain. That we both husband and wife have received injuries and are having pain. I arranged vehicle and first me and my wife Joginder Kaur we went to Civil Hospital Ahmedgarh, where nurse told us that doctor is on leave and then I took my wife to civil hospital Malerkotla and we both got admitted for treatment. That where on 17.11.2023 ASI Amrik Singh police station Sadar Ahmedgarh recorded his statement in presence of his wife Joginder Kaur. That on 20.11.2023 my wife Joginder Kaur died. My wife Joginder Kaur died due to swear beating given my son Gurpreet Singh, my daughter-in law Harpreet Kaur and two grandsons Gursimran Singh and Jaspal Singh. Legal action must be taken against them. Came to you along with my aunty son Sukhdev Singh son of Babu Singh resident of Raipur District Malerkotla. Statement has been recorded in writing and heard and found correct. SD/- Raghvir Singh.” 4. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. 5. 6. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows: “14. ROLE OF THE PETITIONER. The present FIR was registered against accused Gurpreet Singh, Harpreet Kaur, Gursimran Singh and Jaispal Singh on the basis of statement of Raghveer Singh. Gurpreet Singh is real son of deceased Joginder Kaur, who died due to injuries/beatings given to her by this accused along with his co-accused. There are clear cut allegations against the petitioner that wife of the complainant and the complaint were badly injured by the petitioner/accused and his associates. The 2 Jyoti Sharma 2025.08.19 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh CRM-M-29326-2024 offence attributed to accused and his co-accused are very serious in nature. Due to these injuries, wife of the complainant remained admitted in Civil Hospital, Malerkotla and she died during treatment. As per opinion, injury No.2 near the chin of deceased Joginder Kaur as grievous in nature and injury no. 3 on the ankle of left leg of Raghvir Singh was also declared as grievous in nature. So, a specific role is attributed to the petitioner in the commission of present offence.” 7. Allegation against the petitioner is of murder of his mother which is a cruel act on this planet. 8. The arguments on behalf of the petitioner that the witnesses have turned hostile is also not sufficient to grant bail because in the family it is normal that after losing one person, all efforts will be made to save the other, and it looks like one such case. The remedy lies in requesting the trial court as an exceptional case to expedite the trial and decide it as early as possible. 9. A perusal of the bail petition and the documents attached primafacie points towards the petitioner’s involvement and does not make out a case for bail. The impact of crime would also not justify bail. Any further discussions will likely prejudice the petitioner; this court refrains from doing so. 10. The petitioner’s custody of around 01 year, 07 months and 18 days based on custody certificate dated 31.07.2025 cannot be termed prolonged, given the minimum sentence prescribed for the offense, which is life imprisonment. 11. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 12.
Decision
Petition dismissed. All pending applications, if any, are disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 19.08.2025 Jyoti Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No. Whether reportable: Jyoti Sharma 2025.08.19 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh 3