In the High court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

Asha Rani versus State of Haryana

List of events
S no. date Event Annexure

1 30.11.2016 1. petitioner is falsely implicated in the case FIR no.

292 U/s 302/328/364/120-B IPC, registered in
Pg no. 2
the police station Jackhal, District Fatehabad,
Haryana

2. the petitioner is a lady with 2 children and has

been in custody since 04.12.2016, for about 4
years

2 30.11.2016 Relevant content from the FIR P-1

pg. no. 2,3 1. According to the statement of Sohan S/o Phula

Ram, on 30.11.2016, he was gone for doing
labour work in the fields of Jamail Singh.

2. where he received the information the dead

body of his brother Mohan was lying on the
waste of rice straw (prali), which is situated
adjacent to the village funeral ground and there
is injury on his head and sufficient blood has
oozed out from the head.

3. I gave the information to my brother Satpal and

nephew Sandeep, and both came on the spot
and saw the dead body.

4. On seeing that, they felt that their brother had

been killed by an unknown person by inflicting
injuries on his head.

3 Pg no. 3,4 1. The petitioner has been implicated in the

present case later on, on the supplementary
statement of the complainant, whereby the has
made improvement in his statement, alleging
that he learnt that the petitioner had illicit
relationship with some boy and the petitioner
along with the said boy had murdered his
brother Mohan

2. apart from aforesaid statement on the

disclosure of the petitioner has been used by the
prosecution, in order to involve the petitioner in
 the present case

4 28.07.2017 The charges of the present case was framed on this day,
and the trial has been non going since then the same is
pg no. 4
not concluded and further is likely to take long time in
view of covid-19 situation

5 pg no. 4 the petitioner who is a lady is being implicated by her in

laws to deny her property

6 20.08.2018 1. In the order rejecting bail titled ‘Asha Rani v/s P-2, P-3, P-4
state of Haryana’ as per the prosecution version
pg. no. 4, 5
one Sandeep @ Vikram S/o Raghbir had
allegedly stated in his statement u/s 169 Cr.P.C.
that he had found the mobile phone of the
petitioner accused having chip and sim and lots
of photographs of the petitioner with the co
accused and there were certain recordings of
their conversation as well

2. When the same Sandeep @ Vikram S/o Raghbir

was examined as PW10, he did not mention any
chip or any photographs or recordings in his
testimony whatsoever and thus it shows that the
case against the petitioner is false.

7 20.08.2018 1. The petitioner had approached the court of Ld. P-5

Additional Session judge, Fatehabad for grant of
pg no. 6
regular bail which was dismissed

8 09.11.2020 The petitioner had approached this hon’ble court for

grant of regular bail which was dismissed as
pg no. 6
withdrawn

9 Page no. 6 Grounds for granting of Regular Bail

1. it was a blind murderer, no concrete or direct

evidence against the petitioner

2. Petitioner has been in custody for 4 and half

years, and the trial is likely to take more time.
the present petitioner is a lady with two monir
children

3. The entire story of the prosecution is

false,baseless, improbable and attempts to
Page no. 7 falsely implicate the present petitioner. also
shows malafide

4. In this Hon'ble High Court in Dalip Singh @

Deepa Vs State of Punjab it was held that long
 pendency of trial after conviction would be
ground for consideration of bail

5. Vaman Narain Ghiya V State of Rajasthan

Page no. 8,
(2009)2 SCC 281.
9,10
6. Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v state of
Maharashtra

7. State of UP v Amarmani Tripathi 8 SCC 21

Page no.
10,11,12

Page no.12

Page no.
12, 13

Details of annexures
S no. Annexure Detail Page number

1 P-1 A true translated copy of the FIR 16

2 P-2, P-3, A copy of testimony of PW9, PW10, PW11 20,22,24

P-4

3 P-5 A copy of order dated 20.08.2018 26

4 P-6 A true copy of the order 09.11.2020 15