Back
2021 Supreme(P&H) 613
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Alka Sarin, J.
Harpreet Singh @ Hira - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M-45-2021(O&M)
Decided On : 11-01-2021
Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Ramandeep Sandhu, Sr. DAG, Punjab, for the Respondent
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner based on the delay in lodging the FIR and the expected trial delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Headnote:
Delay in Lodging FIR - Regular Bail - The court granted regular bail to the petitioner considering the delay in lodging the FIR and the nature of the injury attributed to the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a first petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in a case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner argued that there was a delay of 7 days in lodging the FIR and questioned the explanation given for the delay.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without commenting on the merits of the case, granted the concession of regular bail to the petitioner, considering the delay in trial due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the nature of the injury attributed to the petitioner.
Issues: Delay in lodging the FIR, nature of the injury attributed to the petitioner, and the likelihood of trial delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ratio Decidendi: The court deemed it fit to grant regular bail to the petitioner due to the delay in lodging the FIR and the expected trial delay, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Final Decision: The petitioner was directed to be released on bail, with the prosecution having the liberty to apply for cancellation of bail if the petitioner misuses the concession of bail. The court made it clear that its observations should not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
JUDGMENT
Alka Sarin, J. (Oral). - Heard through video conferencing.
2. This is a first petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.140 dated 31.10.2020 under Sections 323, 324, 341, 506, 427, 379-B(2), 326, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Qila Lal Singh, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that there is a delay of 07 days in lodging the FIR. The alleged incident is of 24.10.2020 while the FIR was lodged on 31.10.2020. The learned counsel has further contended that the only explanation given for the delay in lodging of the FIR is that though the injured was declared fit for making statement by the Doctor he stated that he would get his statement recorded only after receiving the X-ray report, which casts a doubt on the story put forth by the complainant. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that the injury though attributed to him attracts Section 326 IPC, however, the same is on the finger and the co-accused, who has been attributed injury No.4, has since been granted bail.
4. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Iqbal Singh, has stated that the petitioner has been attributed with an injury which attracts Section 326 IPC in the present case. However, he is not in a position to deny that the injury is on the index finger. Further, learned State counsel is also not in position to deny that the only explanation given for delay in lodging of the FIR is that the complainant-injured wanted his statement recorded only after the receipt of the X-ray report.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. In view of the above and considering the fact that the trial is likely to take some time to conclude especially in view of the prevailing conditions on account of COVID-19 pandemic, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars any further.
7. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, I deem it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate/Trial Court concerned.
8. However, the Prosecution will always be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail in case the petitioner is found to be misusing the concession of bail in any manner.
9. It is also made clear that any observation made herein shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
10. Disposed off.
