Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(P&H) 797

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anupinder Singh Grewal, J.
Fauji @ Baljit Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M-6181-2021 (O&M)
Decided On : 23-08-2022

Advocates:
Mr. M.D.Khan, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Arun William, AAG, Punjab., for the Respondent.

The decision emphasized that lack of material evidence, prolonged custody, and absence of criminal antecedents can warrant the grant of regular bail, and mere contact with a co-accused may not be sufficient to establish guilt.

Headnote:
Regular Bail - Alleged Offence under Sections 365, 120-B, 302, 201 IPC - The court granted regular bail to the petitioner based on lack of credible material to implicate the petitioner, prolonged custody, and absence of criminal antecedents.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought regular bail in a case involving allegations under Sections 365, 120-B, 302, 201 IPC. The petitioner's brother was in a relationship with the deceased, who was married to another person. The petitioner was arraigned as an accused based on the statement of the co-accused, and the body of the deceased had not been recovered.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner's prolonged custody, lack of credible material to implicate the petitioner, and absence of criminal antecedents warranted the grant of regular bail. The court emphasized that the petitioner's contact with the co-accused, who was his brother, was not sufficient to establish incriminating circumstances.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's alleged involvement in the offence, the lack of material evidence against the petitioner, and the duration of the petitioner's custody.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the absence of material evidence implicating the petitioner, the prolonged custody of the petitioner, and the lack of criminal antecedents. The court emphasized that mere contact with the co-accused, who was the petitioner's brother, was not enough to establish guilt.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on regular bail upon furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

JUDGMENT

Anupinder Singh Grewal, J. (Oral) - The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.43 dated 24.09.2017, under Sections 365, 120-B, 302, 201 IPC, registered at Police Station Ghanie Ke Bangar, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is alleged in the FIR that the brother of the petitioner namely Ranjit Singh was in a relationship with the deceased although she was married to one Mukhtiar Singh. The petitioner has been arraigned as an accused on the statement of co-accused Ranjit Singh and besides the statement of co-accused, there is no credible material to implicate the petitioner in the alleged offence. He further submits that body of Amarjit Kaur has not been recovered. The petitioner is in custody for over 2 1/2 years and does not have any criminal antecedents.

3. Learned State counsel has filed custody certificate which indicates that the petitioner is in custody for 02 years, 06 months and 21 days. He upon instructions from ASI Kulwinder Singh submits that 30 out of 43 prosecution witnesses have been examined. He further states that in view of the serious allegation against the petitioner, he is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. There are call details of the petitioner with the co-accused Ranjit Singh.

4. Heard.

5. The petitioner has been arraigned as an accused on the statement of co-accused Ranjit Singh. Merely because the petitioner was in touch with co-accused Ranjit Singh, who is his brother, would not by itself be held to be an incriminating circumstance. There is no other material to implicate the petitioner in the commission of offence. He is in custody for over 2 1/2 years. He is not involved in any other case and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

6. In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document