Alok Singh, J. - (1.) THIS is an application seeking regular bail in case FIR No.216 dated 31.10.2008 under Sections 307/498-A IPC, later on converted to Sections 302/304B IPC, P.S. Garhshankar, District Hoshiarpur.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner is the mother-in-law of the deceased and is in judicial custody w.e.f. 31.3.2009. She has further stated that despite of almost two years, all the prosecution witnesses have not been examined as yet and trial may take some time, therefore, in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble the Apex Court in the matter of State of Kerala Vs. Raneef, 2011(1) RCR (Criminal) 381, petitioner should be enlarged on bail because in the event of rejection of bail, time spent in the jail cannot be restored to the accused, if ultimately the accused is acquitted by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that Mamta deceased was taken to the hospital by her husband, since she caught fire accidentally while preparing tea on the stove. It has further been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that even as per dying declaration, motherin- law has not played role because in her dying declaration, deceased has stated that her brother-in-law threw oil from back on her and put the match stick on her and thereafter, her husband came who threw water on her to extinguish the fire and thereafter, mother-in-law had put match stick on her.
(3.) AFTER pouring water, fire is not possible by the mother-in-law. Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on the instructions of ASI Nirmal Singh, states that out of 18 witnesses, only four have been examined.;