Jagseer Singh @ Jaggi v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 24.2.2022 Jagseer Singh @ Jaggi .... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Jagmeet Singh Moudgill, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. M.S.Dullat, Addl. AG, Punjab.

Ms. Navjot Singh, Advocate, for the complainant. (Proceedings conducted through video conferencing) ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral) CRM-4724-2022 In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the matter is preponed from 5.4.2022 and is taken on Board today.

1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No.158, dated 29.7.2021, Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur, under Sections 323, 427, 458, 506, 148, 149 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act. 2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Lakhwinder Dass wherein it has broadly been alleged that petitioner-Jagseer Singh along with his co-accused inflicted injuries upon the complainant and his brother

- 2 - Baljinder Dass. The petitioner is attributed a blow with 'axe' which he is stated to have inflicted on the backside of the head of the complainant's brother.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has falsely been implicated in the instant case and that even as per the FIR the petitioner is attributed a single blow only and that all the injuries as allegedly sustained by the complainant and his brother have been found to be simple injuries. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last 1 month and 17 days. It has been submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the petitioner as well as other co-accused are seasoned criminals inasmuch as a co-accused Jagsir Khan stands involved in 7 other cases and that they have been threatening the complainant and witnesses of dire consequences. It has been submitted that in case the petitioner is granted bail, he is also likely to intimidate the complainant and the witnesses and in these circumstances the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. Learned State counsel has however, informed that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. 5.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 6.

Having regard to the fact that it is a case of causing simple injuries and the petitioner is attributed a solitary blow on the back of head of the complainant's brother and otherwise has a clean record, the

- 3 - petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

24.2.2022 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) Mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No