Back
2021 Supreme(P&H) 502
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.
Shankar Kumar @ Shankar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M-23653 of 2021
Decided On : 21-06-2021
For the Petitioner:Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab
The main legal point established in the judgment is that anticipatory bail may be granted when no specific role is attributed to the petitioner and when co-accused have already been granted bail, subject to the petitioner's undertaking to join the investigation and abide by the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Headnote:
Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner as no specific role was attributed to the petitioner in the alleged incident, and considering that the co-accused had already been granted bail. The petitioner was directed to join the investigation within two weeks and abide by the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of indecent remarks and an immoral act, including touching the complainant's breast, against the petitioner and other accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no specific role had been attributed to the petitioner, and considering that the co-accused had already been granted bail, the court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to join the investigation within two weeks and abide by the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's alleged involvement in the incident, the grant of anticipatory bail, and the requirement to join the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner, the grant of bail to the co-accused, and the petitioner's undertaking to join the investigation and abide by the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Final Decision: The petition seeking anticipatory bail was allowed, and the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail subject to joining the investigation within two weeks and abiding by the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
JUDGMENT :
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.
1. The matter is taken up for hearing through video conference due to COVID-19 situation.
2. This is a petition seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 58 dated 24.5.2021, under Sections 354, 379, 506, 427, 148 and 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Daba, District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana.
3. The FIR was at the instance of Komal wife of Mohit Bhagat.
4. She stated that on 23.5.2021, at about 9.30 PM, she along with her husband went out for a walk when the petitioner and other accused were standing in the street. The accused namely Happy started making video of the complainant from behind. On raising objection, the accused started abusing them and started immoral act. The allegations are that one of the accused-Joga Singh touched the breast of the complainant.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no role has been attributed to the petitioner. It is a case of false implication. He relies upon the order dated 3.6.2021 whereby co-accused Vicky Singh has been granted bail by the court below.
6. Learned counsel for the State, appearing on advance notice, submits that all the accused were together. They passed indecent remarks and it was due to their act that the alleged incident occurred. She further submits that the co-accused have been granted regular bail whereas prayer in the present petition is for anticipatory bail.
7. From the facts of the case, it is evident that no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner. The specific allegations if any were against Happy and Joga Singh. Considering that the co-accused have already been granted bail, it is not a fit case to deny personal liberty of the petitioner, the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail subject to his joining investigation within two weeks. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail bond to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. He is directed to join the investigation as and when called upon. He shall abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
8. The petition is allowed.
9. In case of failure of the petitioner to join the investigation, the State would be at liberty to file an application for re-calling of this order.
