← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/16287/2017dismissed

Jagmeet Singh v. State Of Punjab

2017-07-24Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (i) CRM No.M-16287 of 2017 (O&M) Jagmeet Singh

...Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

(ii) CRM No.M-16593 of 2017 (O&M) Bhim Singh Chibbar

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

Date of Decision: July 24, 2017

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Pardeep Singh Rana, Advocate for the petitioner (in CRM No.M-16287 of 2017). Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat, Advocate for the petitioner (in CRM No.M-16593 of 2017). Mr.Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Sr. DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Both the above-mentioned cases are taken up together as the same have arisen from same FIR.

Petitioners have filed these petitions under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.0142 dated 27.11.2016 under Vineet Gulati 2017.07.27 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-16287 of 2017 and connected petition -2Sections 307, 392, 223, 224, 120-B, 148, 149, 201, 419, 170, 171, 353, 186, 212, 216, 489 IPC, Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act, Sections 11, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20 of UAP Act and Sections 22 and 29 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Kotwali Nabha, District Patiala. Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. The perusal of the record shows that petitioner Bhim Singh Chibbar was posted as Assistant Superintendent, Maximum Security Jail, Nabha and petitioner Jagmeet Singh was posted as Jail Warden. There are allegations that both these petitioners under Section 120-B conspired with other accused vide which, five hardcore criminals fled away from the jail. The co-accused has also nominated Assistant Superintendent and he was stated to be present on the spot. The allegation against the Jail Warden is that he opened the gate.

Keeping in view the nature and gravity of the offence, serious allegations against the petitioners and in view of the fact that no witness has been examined so far and the case is at preliminary stage, I do not find it a fit case where petitioners are entitled to benefit of regular bail. Therefore, finding no merit in both the petitions, the same are dismissed.

July 24, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2017.07.27 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh