Ranjodh Singh @ Sunny Yahma v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-11959-2017 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M-11959-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision : 10.05.2017 Ranjodh Singh @ Sunny Yahma ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH

Present:

Mr. Balbir Singh Jaswal, Advocate, for the applicant/petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Mehta, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

**** AMOL RATTAN SINGH, JUDGE (ORAL) CRM-14774-2017 By this application, the applicant/petitioner seeks that the offences subsequently added in the FIR, as are alleged to have been committed by him and his co-accused, be also considered to be offences in respect of which he is seeking bail in the accompanying petition. It is not refuted by learned State counsel that the offences have been so added in the FIR.

Consequently, this application is allowed and the offences mentioned in paragraph 4 of the application are treated to be also offences for the alleged commission of which the applicant/petitioner seeking the concession of bail.

CRM-M-11959-2017 Learned counsel for the petitioner again points to the fact that both the co-accused of the petitioner, who were actually apprehended at the spot, i.e. from the emergency ward of Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, (with the Virendra Singh Adhikari 2017.05.12 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-11959-2017 (O&M) -2petitioner and one more person stated to have run away), have already been admitted to bail by this Court vide its order dated 19.12.2016 and 23.01.2017 passed in CRM-M-42245-2016 and CRM-M-541-2017, respectively.

It is seen, as per the custody certificate filed in Court today by the learned State counsel, that the petitioner has put in 07 months and 05 days of actual custody. However, considering the fact that the petitioner is stated to be involved in another case for the alleged commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and further, learned State counsel has also stated, on instructions, that he has been accused in yet another FIR, which is not mentioned in the custody certificate, I do not consider it appropriate to admit the petitioner to bail, at this stage. Dismissed.

(AMOL RATTAN SINGH) JUDGE 10.05. 2017 adhikari Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Virendra Singh Adhikari 2017.05.12 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh