Avtar Singh @ Pappa vs State of Punjab

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 1777

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sudhir Mittal, J.
Avtar Singh @ Pappa – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M No. 18538 of 2023
Decided On : 16-05-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Parties : Mr. Chandan Singh Rana, Ms. Himani, Mr. Gurlal Singh Dhillon AAG, Punjab, Mr. Yogesh Goel, Mr. Lakshay Goel, Mr. Izairra Mittal

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302, 379-B, 506, 148, 149 - Bail application - The petitioner sought regular bail citing parity with a co-accused already granted bail - The State conceded that the petitioner is identically situated as the co-accused - Objections were raised by the complainant based on resiling from statement and pending applications for re-examination - The delay in hearing these applications does not justify withholding bail - Granting bail to the petitioner is aligned with the principle of justice and fairness. (Paras 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought bail in an FIR alleging serious offenses including murder and robbery stemming from a dispute; the complainant had changed his stance during the trial, questioning the prosecution.

Findings of Court:
The petition was allowed, directing the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing requisite surety bonds, dismissing objections regarding pending applications as affecting the bail hearing.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail on the principle of parity with a co-accused granted bail despite objections related to the complainant's changing testimony.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the trial's delays and objections do not warrant postponing the bail application's outcome and affirmed the importance of judicial fairness in granting bail.

Result: Bail granted.

Table of Content
1. allowing submission of annexures (Para 1)
2. bail application filed based on parity (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
3. objections raised against bail grant due to witness statements (Para 5 , 6)
4. trial court to decide on witness examination issues (Para 7)
5. granting bail with conditions (Para 8)

Judgment

Mr. Sudhir Mittal, J. :-

Crl. Misc. No. 21487 of 2023

1. This application has been filed for placing on record Annexures C-1 to C-5. For the reasons stated therein, application is allowed and Annexures aforementioned are taken on record.

Crl. Misc. No. M-18538 of 2023

2. The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 102 dated 16.06.2021, registered at Police Station Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana, under Sections 302 , 379-B, 506, 148, 149 IPC (Section 201 IPC added later on).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the identically situated co-accused Surjit Singh @ Kala Singh has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 14.03.2023 passed in CRM-M-55557-2022. Thus, on the principle of parity the petitioner may also be granted regular bail.

4. Learned State counsel concedes that the petitioner is situated identically as co-accused Surjit Singh @ Kala Singh aforementioned.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant objects to the grant of regular bail on the ground that the complainant who had resiled from his statement during the course of the trial has filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for his re- examination. One person namely Gurmukh Singh has filed an application for being examined as a witness as the police has not cited him as such in the challan. Both these applications are pending for 22.05.2023 and, thus, the hearing may be deferred. An application for cancellation of bail of Surjit Singh @ Kala Singh aforementioned has also been filed.

6. It is a fact that the complainant has not supported the prosecution version when he was examined as a witness and that the wife of the deceased has submitted a representation stating that the prosecution of the accused is wrong and malicious. This is evident from perusal of order dated 14.03.2023 passed in CRM-M-55557-2022.

7. After more than one year of the trial the complainant seeks to get himself re-examined. Gurmukh Singh seeks to get himself examined as a witness. Whether the same are justified or not is an issue to be decided by the trial Court. Decision of the bail application of the co-accused can not be delayed for the said reason.

8. The petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document