Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(P&H) 1226

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Harnaresh Singh Gill, J.
Sunny - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M-37671-2021 (O & M)
Decided On : 19-01-2022

Advocates:
Mr. Onkar Singh, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.

The decision to grant bail was based on the nature of injuries, the status of the co-accused, and the prolonged trial process.

Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the petitioner in a case involving charges under Sections 326, 324, 323, 341, 148 and 149 IPC, considering the nature of injuries, the fact that the co-accused were granted bail, and the prolonged trial process.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought regular bail in a case involving charges under Sections 326, 324, 323, 341, 148 and 149 IPC, where he was accused of giving beatings to the complainant who had suffered 12 injuries.
Finding of the Court:

The court, without commenting on the merits of the case, granted bail to the petitioner due to the prolonged trial process and the fact that the co-accused were already granted bail.
Issues: The issues involved the nature of injuries, the petitioner's alleged implication, and the prolonged trial process.
Ratio Decidendi: The decision was influenced by the fact that the co-accused were already granted bail, the nature of injuries being simple, and the prolonged trial process.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner to be released on bail.

JUDGMENT

Harnaresh Singh Gill , J. (Oral) - Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

CRM-1722-2022

Allowed as prayed for. Annexures P-3 and P-4 are taken on record.

2. Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case bearing FIR No.56 dated 05.06.2021, registered at Police Station Hajipur, District Hoshiarpur, under Sections 326, 324, 323, 341, 148 and 149 IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case; that injuries allegedly attributed to the petitioner are simple in nature; that the petitioner has been in custody since 25.06.2021, and that it is a version and cross-version case and it is yet to be ascertained as to which party was the aggressor one; that co-accused, namely Manjeet Singh @ Haddi and Goldy @ Gobind Rai stand enlarged on ad interim pre-arrest bail by this Court, vide orders dated 18.08.2021 and 27.10.2021 (Annexure P-3 and P-4, respectively) passed by this Court.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, while opposing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the petitioner was specifically named in the FIR and he gave beatings to the complainant-Manpreet Singh, who had suffered 12 injuries.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. The challan stands presented. It is a case of version and cross- version and it is yet to be ascertained as to which party was the aggressor one. As stated above, the co-accused stand granted ad interim pre-arrest bail. The petitioner has been in custody since 25.06.2021. The prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. Trial of the case would take time to conclude. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.

6. In view of the above, without commenting anything on the merits, lest it should prejudice the case of either side, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document