SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(P&H) 1035

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Arun Kumar Tyagi, J.
Narinder Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M No. 18161 of 2021
Decided On : 30-06-2021

Advocates Appeared:
Bhanu Pratap Singh, Advocate, Rana Harjasdeep Singh, Advocate, Arnav Sood, Advocate

The court considered the nature of the accusation, evidence against the petitioner, his role in the occurrence, and the likelihood of a long trial due to Covid-19 restrictions before granting regular bail.

Headnote:

Regular Bail - Criminal Procedure - The court granted regular bail to the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in a case involving charges under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, along with Sections 323 and 341 of the IPC. The court considered the nature of the accusation, evidence against the petitioner, his role in the occurrence, and the likelihood of a long trial due to Covid-19 restrictions before granting bail.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a petition for grant of regular bail in a case involving charges under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, along with Sections 323 and 341 of the IPC. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and his co-accused caused injuries to the complainant and Daljit Singh, resulting in the latter's death.

Finding of the Court:

The court, after considering the nature of the accusation, evidence against the petitioner, his role in the occurrence, and the likelihood of a long trial due to Covid-19 restrictions, granted regular bail to the petitioner without commenting on the merits of the case.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner deserved regular bail considering the nature of the accusation, evidence against him, and his role in the occurrence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of the accusation, evidence against the petitioner, his role in the occurrence, and the likelihood of a long trial due to Covid-19 restrictions before granting regular bail.

Final Decision: The petition for regular bail was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on regular bail upon furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

JUDGMENT

Arun Kumar Tyagi, J. - The petitioner has filed the present (first) petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.92 dated 03.10.2020 registered under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "the IPC") at Police Station Gardhiwala, District Hoshiarpur to which Sections 323 and 341 of the IPC were added lateron.

2. Briefly stated the prosecution version as contained in the above referred FIR is that on 02.10.2020, complainant Harwinder Singh was returning to his village on his motorcycle along with Daljit Singh. When they reached at the turning point of the street leading to the house of the Sarpanch, Paramjit Singh @ Pamma and the petitioner armed with dangs and Rahul Singh Rana armed with datar were standing there. Paramjit Singh @ Pamma and the petitioner came in front of his motorcycle and encircled them. Paramjit Singh @ Pamma pulled out keys of his motorcycle. The petitioner exhorted to teach them a lesson and kill them. Daljit Singh stood in the side after alighting from the motorcycle. Rampal father of Daljit Singh also came there. Rahul Singh Rana inflicted blow with datar aiming the head of Daljit Singh but he raised his hand and the blow fell on his hand due to which wrist of Dajit Singh was partly severed resulting in its hanging from the arm. Rampal, father of Daljit Singh, took him away from there. Thereafter, Rahul Singh Rana inflicted blow with datar from its reverse side on his wrist due to which he fell down from the motorcycle. Thereafter, Rahul Singh Rana inflicted blow with datar from its reverse side on his back on right side of his shoulder and on right thumb. Then, the petitioner inflicted blows with dang on his right ear and right and left shoulders. When he raised alarm, the assailants fled from the spot with their respective weapons. Gurpreet Singh got him admitted in PHC Bhunga. Daljit Singh was got admitted in IVY Hospital, Hoshiarpur where he succumbed to the injury later. The motive for the occurrence was the minor altercation which had taken place between the complainant and the accused some time ago.

3. The petitioner being in custody has filed the present petition for grant of regular bail.

4. The petition has been opposed by the respondent-State in terms of short reply filed by way of affidavit of Gurpreet Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Head Quarter), Hoshiarpur-cumIncharge Sub-Division Tanda, District Hoshiarpur in the Registry of this Court, which is taken on record.

5. The petition has also been opposed by the complainant. However, no reply has been filed by the complainant.

6. Custody certificate has been filed by the learned State Counsel through e-mail print out of which is taken on record.

7. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel and learned Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the relevant record.

8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner, who is 55 years of age, has been falsely implicated in the case. In his statement dated 03.10.2020 the deceased had alleged that Rahul Singh Rana had caused injuries to him and had not named the petitioner to be one of the assailants. Even otherwise, as per the prosecution version, the petitioner was armed with dang. The petitioner is not alleged to have caused any injury to the deceased. The petitioner is alleged to have caused injuries to complainant Harwinder Singh which injuries were on non-vital parts of the body and were declared to be simple in nature. The trial is likely to take long time due to restrictions imposed to prevent spread of Covid-19. No useful purpose will be served by further detention of the petitioner in custody. Therefore, the petitioner may be granted regular bail.

9. On the other hand, learned State Counsel and learned Counsel for the complainant have submitted that the petitioner exhorted his his co-accused to kill the complainant and Dal

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top