High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/10629/2017allowed

Jagjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

2017-04-28Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-10629 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:28.4.2017 Jagjit Singh .....Petitioner v.

State of Punjab .....Respondent ....

Present:

Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.63 dated 6.9.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324 and 34 IPC and (Sections 325 and 326 IPC, which were added later on) at Police Station Sarhali, District Tarn Taran.

Notice of motion has been issued in this case. Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and contested this petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State and have gone through the record.

As per the prosecution version, the petitioner is named in the Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.05.02 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-10629 of 2017 [2] FIR. He is stated to be armed with a `dang' and he gave injury which falls under Section 325 IPC on the left knee. The present petitioner has not given the injury which falls under Section 326 IPC. The grievous injury which falls under Section 326 IPC has been attributed to the co-accused and that injury is on index finger.

The petitioner has already joined the investigation. The petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. Nothing is to be recovered from him. No useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioner to custody.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case; without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find merit in this petition and the same is allowed. The interim order dated 29.3.2017 passed by this Court granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall abide by the conditions of Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. April 28, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.05.02 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh