Karamjit Singh v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 13.03.2024 KARAMJIT SINGH ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present:
Mr. P.B.S. Goraya, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R. No.49 dated 15.03.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 420, 468, 471, 120-B, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25, 27, 54, 59 of Arms Act, at Police Station City Patti, District Tarn Taran. 2.
Custody Certificate of the petitioner has been filed today in Court. The same is taken on record.
3.
FIR was registered on the information supplied by Daljit Singh son of Gurmej Singh who alleged as under:
"xxx I am resident of above mentioned address and working as a labourer at railway station, Patti. I have two sister and both are married. My wife Veena Rani is working at thread mill at Ludhiana. My mother had expired two years back and now my father Gurmej Singh is living with me at my house. On dated 14.03.2022, I was present at my home with my father and around
3.00 PM my father received a phone call from mobile no. 7696886116 on his mobile phone No. 9779998235 and my father told me that they are going towards Buwana Mandir side. My father was riding the motor cycle and I was pillion riding and after reaching Buwana Mandir, my father made a call to the same number and then the both went to railway crossing and after waiting there for some time, we were coming back but from one side two young persons with muffled faces came on motorcycle and after stopping their motorcycle near us, asked for the address of Gurbachan Singh but my father reply that he does not know. In the mean time the person who was pillion riding, took out pistol fired at my father with intention to kill and the shot hit my father on his left cheek and both the persons fled way on the motorcycle.
After arranging a vehicle, I took my father to Sandhu Hospital, Patti and after giving first aid, the doctor referred my father to Amandeep Hospital where my father is undergoing treatment. That if brought before me, I can identify both of persons. They have done in justice with us by firing with the intention to kill and causing injury to my father Strict legal action be taken against them. I was coming to inform you that you met us on the way. Statement given, heard, it is correct. SD/- Daljit Singh xxx" 4.
As per the case of the prosecution, Jatinder Singh is the main accused who was in relationship with Veena Rani wife of Daljit Singh. Jatinder Singh is stated to have suffered a disclosure while in police custody claiming as under:
! " # !# $ %&' ' ( ! )"
##" # % '
* $#) "
"
#& # +,- %$ # "
#."
&
$. "# % &/
)
"
/
# ##! %� 1 )' 2 . . ' % #'##
"## 1' 3
# %& ' # &. ### 45&#) 6
2 !& 7,# 8
& #7 ## &#.
# #
45# # ## '#)
# 9. %& )
# ' % & 2 %#& " ) : ')
" # 1)# #'
!$20( 1 %&!# % '#
;3(3033'.
. /
.
*.
# & ! * #&' ' " ) %&.## 1' !*
& 6 2 .## '# ;3(3033 '# (;;((0(</
) & '7
&&
1 #) /
) #
*
45# ' ' .& .. # .
97 1 #) & #/
) & .##
% /
) #) & & . % 7&.#7
##
% '
!
' # . '
= ..
% 7 7#
5.
As per the disclosure petitioner is stated to be the one who was driving the motorcycle while shot was fired by main accused Jatinder Singh. Petitioner is behind bars since 1 year, 11 months and 27 days i.e. almost 2 years. Not only the challan stands presented but the trial has proceeded considerably as 7 material witnesses stand examined. 6.
State Counsel is not in posititon to dispute the factual assertions made by counsel for the petitioner based on record. 7.
I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through records of the case.
8.
Without commenting on the merits of the case, keeping in view the incarceration already suffered by the petitioner, the allegations levelled against the petitioner and the nature of evidence against him, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.
9.
Needless to say that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. March 13, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No