High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/19014/2017allowed

Ajay Kumar v. State Of Punjab

2017-09-06Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

CRM No.M-19014 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-19014 of 2017 Decided on: 06.09.2017 Ajay Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

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

Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. K.S. Sidhu, DAG, Punjab.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) The petitioner prays for grant of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') in FIR No.247 dated 17.12.2016, for offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 452, 427, 506, 148, 149 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') registered in Police Station Sadar, Jalandhar. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 22.03.2017; challan has been presented on 19.05.2017 and the investigation in this case has already been completed, however, charges are yet to be framed. It is further submitted that all the co-accused of the petitioner have been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order dated 26.05.2017 passed in CRM-M Nos.2483, 10660 and 2778 of 2017.

He has argued that dispute between the parties has been settled and a petition i.e. CRM-M No.25115 of 2017 seeking quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise has already been filed in which notice of motion has been Mohd. Yakub 2017.09.

CRM No.M-19014 of 2017 issued on 17.07.2017. He has further argued that no purpose would be served by keeping the present petitioner in custody as the dispute between the parties has already been settled; the petitioner is no more required for any further custodial interrogation and conclusion of the trial will take long time.

Counsel for the State, on instructions from HC Karam Singh, has not disputed the factual assertions but opposed the prayer for bail. He has further submitted that the petitioner is the main accused who has attributed grievous injury on the head of Gurdial Singh. I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the paperbook and the records.

Without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail, if the petitioner is found involved misusing the concession of bail, in any manner.

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 06.09.2017 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Mohd. Yakub 2017.09.07 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh