High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/2439/2022allowed

Angrej Singh v. State Of Punjab

2022-05-23Mr. Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-2439-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.05.2022 ANGREJ SINGH

STATE OF PUNJAB

!!!!

Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case bearing FIR No.84 dated 13.07.2019, registered at Police Station Sadar, Sri Muktsar Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, under Sections 307, 302, 120-B, 148, 149 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (amended 2015) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are total 11 accused in the present FIR; that it is a case of double murder; that no injury has been attributed to the petitioner; that the petitioner has been in custody since 09.08.2019 and that co-accused, namely, Guljar Singh, Jasveer Singh and Gurpartap Singh, have already been granted the concession of bail.

Per contra, while opposing the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, learned State counsel does not dispute the custody AMAN JAIN 2022.05.23 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-2439-2022 (O&M) -2period of the petitioner. He, however, submits that the petitioner armed with a pistol, and being a member of unlawful assembly, which with their common intention had killed two persons, namely, Kirandeep Singh and Minni Rani. He further submits that there are total 57 prosecution witnesses, out of which 10 have already been examined. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been in custody since 09.08.2019. Coaccused have already been enlarged on bail. No injury has been attributed to the petitioner. Most of the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. In such circumstances, the trial of the case would take a long time to conclude. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.

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

"# Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No AMAN JAIN 2022.05.23 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment