M.M.PUNCHHI, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition for anticipatory bail by the Bimal Kaur. She is accused of an offence under section 302/34, Indian Penal Code.
(2.) NORMALLY when the offence is of such a nature the Court would be cherry in granting anticipatory bail as that step might hamper the investigation, but here, as would be apparent from the fact mentioned hereafter, a case for anticipatory bail has been made out. The petitioner is the wife of Prem Singh co-accused. Prem Singh and his two brothers, namely, Amarjit Singh co-accused and Ranjit Singh live in the same house in village Mehma, District Patiala, Amarjit Singh was married to Surinder Kaur deceased. Her marriage was in doldrums. Finally on October 27, 1985, she died an unnatural death. The case of the prosecution is that she was put to death. The case of the defence, on the other hand is that it was natural death. The case of the defence alternatively is that it was perhaps a case of suicide.
(3.) THE crucial point in the case is whether there are circumstances on the investigated material from which the Court may reasonable come to the view that the petitioner was a participant in the commission of the crime of murder. It is true that Surinder Kaur's corpse was recovered from the joint house of the three above named brothers in which the petitioner was living inmate. It is equally true that the investigation has collected evidence of neighbors who heard the deceased shriek in pain or terror sometimes before her death. Yet the investigation has not been able to collect any evidence of any person having seen the actual commission of the crime. The sole evidence pointing a finger at the petitioner is of an extra-judicial confession made on 10.11.85 by Amarjit Singh co-accused before Ex Sarpanch Bagicha Singh and Sarpanch Bharpur Singh of village Bhangar, suggesting that the petitioner was a co-participant in the crime.;