Parveen @ Tapli(Presently Confined In District Jail Bhondsi) v. State Of Haryana

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-9639-2019 Date of Decision : October 23, 2019 Parveen @ Tapli ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present :

Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Grewal, DAG, Haryana.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) This is the second petitioner filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.94 dated 19.2.2017 under Sections 307, 34, 120-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sohna, District Gurugram, the earlier was dismissed as not pressed on 15.11.2018.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that co-accued, namely Ashok @ Gabbar, who has nominated the petitioner in the FIR has been granted the concession of regular bail vide order dated 15.11.2018 passed in CRM-M-22454-2018. While granting the bail to the co-accused, the following order was passed :- "Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 19.02.2017 and subsequent to his arrest, he was involved two other FIRs under the provisions of the Arms Act when he was lodged in the judicial custody. He is on bail in

-2aforesaid FIRs.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the allegations in the FIR, on 19.02.2017 complainant-Raghuraj was standing at bus-stand and was feeding the dogs. Some other persons were also standing at the bus- stand. In the meantime, two motorcycles suddenly came at the spot and the persons, who were riding two motorcycles, were Ashok @ Gabbar (petitioner), Mahabir, Vedpal @ Kanu, Shamsher @ Dholu and one Sachin Lohar alongwith other. All these persons started firing upon him. When he raised a voice, his father Ghanshyam,who was also present at the spot, came and tried to give lathi blow on the petitioner in self defence and, thereafter, the accused persons ran away from the spot.

Counsel for the petitioner further submits that thereafter the police got recorded the disclosure statement of the petitioner in which it has come that the first bullet was fired upon Raghuraj by co-accsued Parveen @ Tapli and the second bullet was fired by the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the complainant has already been examined and he appeared as PW-6 and has stated that two bikes came from behind and the riders straight way fired upon him which hit on his back and when he turned back, he saw Ashok @ Gabbar having gun in his hand and smoke was coming out of the barrel. Later on, he came to know that Parveen had fired upon him and the bullet hit him on his thigh near his private part.

-3a civil litigation pending between his father and accused. The petitioner, filed a civil suit and in the civil suit, there was a restrain order against them, in which they were restrained from interfering in the peaceful possession of the disputed land and on the application of co-accused-Mahabir, even the police help was provided against them.

Counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is to be seen during the course of trial whether the motive attributed to the petitioner for causing injuries to the complainant is on account of civil litigation or for the same civil dispute, it is to involve him falsely as there was injunction in his favour. Learned counsel further submits that since the petitioner is in judicial custody for the last 01 year, 06 months and 01 day and out of total 27 prosecution witnesses, 14 have been examined and since the complainant has been examined, there was no possibility of closing the prosecution evidence. Learned counsel further submits that 05 of the accused have already been granted concession of regular bail and only the petitioner and co-accused-Parveen @ Tapli are in judicial custody.

The learned State counsel, on instructions from Investigating Officer, and assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has, however, opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that the petitioner was named in the FIR. There was a direct motive attributed against him that on account of his civil litigation, he has fired upon the complainant

-4and caused grievance injuries.

Learned counsel for the complainant has further argued that even as per FSL report, the version of the prosecution is duly supported and recovery of weapon was effected from the petitioner.

Without commenting anything upon the merits of the case, considering the fact that there is a civil litigation pending between the parties and injunction was granted against the complainant party; motive can be double folded which is to be decided during the course of trial whether the petitioner caused injuries on account of civil litigation or his implication is falsel for the same reason; considering that the petitioner is in judicial custody for the last about 01 year, 06 months and 01 day, and also considering the fact that the complainant stands examined, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate concerned." Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer Rajesh Kumar has not disputed the factual position. He further submits that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, considering the aforementioned submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and that co-accused Ashok @ Gabbar has already been granted the concession of regular bail, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety

-5bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate, concerned.

However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail of the petitioner, in case he is found involved in any other case or misusing the concession of bail, in any manner.

( ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ) JUDGE October 23, 2019 satish Whether speaking/reasoned : YES / NO Whether reportable :

YES / NO