Jashandeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 2024:PHHC:034045 CRM-M-11409-2024 Date of decision: March 11th, 2024 Jashandeep Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Gobind Singh Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Navdeep Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) On oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner, Sections 201 and 411 of the IPC are ordered to be incorporated in the head note and prayer clause of the petition.

2.

Registry to do the needful.

3.

Petitioner is seeking the concession of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in case FIR No.230 dated 05.11.2023 under Sections 379-B (2), 34, 201 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Ranjit Avenue, Police Commissionerate Amritsar. 4.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner has been in custody since 06.11.2023 in a case, wherein he has been implicated on account of some misguided suspicion. It has been further submitted that however, subsequently the misunderstanding between the complainant and the petitioner has been removed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the circumstances, further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose, more so when the investigation in the case in hand PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.03.12 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-11409-2024 -2stands completed and there is no apprehension of the petitioner tampering with evidence and trying to intimidate/influence the complainant. It has also been brought to the notice of this Cout that on account of the parties having ironed out their differences and removed their misunderstandings, both the co-accused had been extended the concession of bail by this Cout vide order dated 29.02.2024. 5.

Per contra, learned State counsel has, on instructions from ASI Surinder Pal Singh, feigned ignorance about the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner with respect to the parties having compromised the matter. He, on further instructions, has however not disputed that the challan stands presented and the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

7.

Allegedly, the petitioner along with co-accused snatched the mobile phone of the complainant and his car. The petitioner has been in custody since 06.11.2023. The matter stands compromised between the complainant and the petitioner.

8.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, coupled with the fact that the petitioner is not involved in any other case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. March 11th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.03.12 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh