PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
Manjinder Singh @ Kaua Sekhon And Another - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M-31558-2023
Decided On : 06-05-2024
JUDGMENT :
Deepak Gupta, J.
In the two petitions tilted above, both filed under Section 439 CrPC, petitioners pray for their release on regular bail in cross case bearing DDRN:71 dated 23.06.2021 registered under Sections 307/ 160/ 148/ 149/ 120B IPC and Sections 25/27 of Arms Act at Police Station City Kotkapura, in FIR No. 135 dated 22.06.2021 registered under Sections 307/ 201/511/160 IPC and Sections 25/27 of Anns Act at Police Station City Kotkapura.2. Separate status reports in both the cases have been filed.
3.1 As per the prosecution version, on 22.06.2021, local police of Police Station City Kotkapura received information about a cross firing having taken place at about 11:00 AM at Jalaleana Road, Rishi Nagar, Kotkapura between Ravel Singh @ Ravila travelling in his Innova Car No.PB-05W-1893 on one side; and unknown persons who had come in their car No.DL-7CG-1918 from the other said and that one person was lying injured at the spot having suffered bullet injury. On the basis of this information, FIR No. 135 (supra) was registered against unknown persons. Spot was inspected. Empty cartridges of different weapons, vehicles, blood smeared earth showing number of rounds, were seized. On the basis of the driving license recovered from the pocket of the pants of the injured person, his name was found to be Deepak Kumar, who was brought dead at Civil Hospital Kotkapura and so, the case was converted to Sector 302 IPC. During inspection of the dead body, 7 live cartridges of 9 mm were recovered from the pants of the deceased.
3.2 On 23.06.2021, Yashpal Singh son of Ram Kishan approached the police and identified the dead body to be of Krishan . son of Ram Kishan. Autopsy was conducted. During further investigation, Ravel Singh @ Ravila was apprehended on 23.06.2021, who in his statement disclosed that on 22.06.2021, as he was coming after meeting his friend, a Corolla car came from the opposite side besides a motorcycle, which were occupied by Krishan Pal (deceased) son of Ram Kishan, Nitish @ Pardhan, Golu, Bachi, Manpreet Singh and 3-4 unknown persons, all of whom started firing indiscriminately towards him with an intention to kill him. He (Ravel Singh @ Ravila) stopped his car and fired two shots upon the assailants with his .32 bore illegal pistol in his defence. He also stated that Krishan Pal was coming towards him very fast and opened the door of his car and then ran towards the backside to save him, but the assailants even fired at their own companion i.e. Kishan Pal. He also stated that while running, magazine of his illegal weapon had fallen down, and that he had fled from the spot. On the basis of this version of Ravel Singh @ Ravila, cross case vide DDR No.71 (supra) was registered against Krishan Pal (deceased) son of Ram Kishan, Nitish @ Pardhan, Golu, Bachi, Manpreet Singh, Gurinderpal Singh @ Gora Bhau and Goldy Brar.
3.3 During further investigation, names of Sukhwinder Singh @ Tang @ Sunny, Harpreet Singh @ Bhau and Manjinder Singh @ Kala Sekhon, also emerged. All of them were apprehended from time to time.
4.1 On behalf of Manjinder Singh @ Kala Sekhon (petitioner in CRM-M-31558-2023), it is contended that he has been implicated on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Manpreet Singh @ Manna, as per which said Manpreet Singh @ Manna had handed over two 9 MM pistols to him (petitioner). Ld. counsel contends that Manpreet Singh @ Manna has been arrayed as an accused on the allegation that he had arranged Corolla car for the assailants and that said Manpreet Singh @ Manna, so as to falsely implicate the petitioner, has suffered disclosure statement with a concocted story to have supplied pistols to the petitioner.
4.2 Ld. counsel contends further that petitioner was not present at the scene of incident; that no specific overt act is attributed to him; that he was arrested on 20.01.2022 on the basis of production warrant though he was already in custody in different case since 29.06.2021; that there is no
The main legal point established is that a bail application cannot be rejected solely based on the accused's involvement in other cases, and the court must consider the specific circumstances of the ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on evidence including CDR, mobile locations, and previous involvements of the accused to establish the role of the petitioner as the m....
The court granted bail considering the lack of specific role in the fatal injury and the duration of custody, alongside co-accused being granted bail.
The court considered the delay in trial, lack of involvement in other criminal cases, and the likelihood of a prolonged trial due to a pending cross case as grounds for granting regular bail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of parity in granting bail, especially when the main accused has already been granted bail and there are no differentiating circu....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.