Gurmej Singh v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH (i) CRM No.M-8127 of 2019 (O&M) Gurmej Singh
...Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab
...Respondent
(ii) CRM No.M-8205 of 2019 (O&M) Narinder Singh
...Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab
...Respondent
(ii) CRM No.M-10404 of 2019 (O&M) Tarsem Singh
...Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab
...Respondent
Date of Decision: March 19, 2019
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH
Present:
Mr.Amit Shukla, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.Dhruv Dayal, Sr.DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.
**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.
All the above-mentioned cases are taken up together as these have arisen from same FIR.
CRM No.M-8127 of 2019 and connected petitions -2Petitioners have filed these petitions under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.102 dated 01.11.2018 under Sections 326, 323, 324 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Rangar Nangal, District Gurdaspur.
Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petitions I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. As per allegations, Gurmejj Singh, who is father-in-law of the injured, was stated to be armed with dang and simple injury is attributed to him. Similarly, Narinder Singh is stated to be armed with baseball bat and injuries under Sections 325 and 323 IPC are attributed to him and he is stated to be mediator in the marriage.
Petitioners Gurmej Singh and Narinder Singh have already joined the investigation. They are not required for custodial interrogation. No useful purpose will be served by sending and keeping these petitioners in custody till the disposal of the case.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and without discussing the facts of the case in minute details and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case, where petitioners Gurmej Singh and Narinder Singh are entitled to benefit of anticipatory bail. Therefore, CRM No.M-8127 of 2019 filed by petitioner Gurmej Singh and CRM No.M-8205 of 2019 filed by Narinder Singh are accepted and the orders dated 22.02.2019 granting interim bail to the petitioners, are made absolute.
As regarding petitioner Tarsem Singh, I find that he is the main
CRM No.M-8127 of 2019 and connected petitions -3accused. Tarsem Singh is stated to be armed with datar and he gave so many injuries with sharp edged weapon. Even, grievous injury under Section 326 IPC is also attributed to him.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of nature and gravity of the offence, I find that petitioner Tarsem Singh is required for custodial interrogation and no ground is made out for granting benefit of anticipatory bail to him. Therefore, finding no merit in CRM No.M-10404 of 2019 filed by petitioner Tarsem Singh, the same is dismissed. March 19, 2019 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No