Karamjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1102 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 18.03.2024 Karamjit Singh ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.(Oral) 1.

Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking concession of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.06 dated 07.01.2024 under Sections 326, 324, 323, 148 and 149 IPC registered at Police Station Mamdot District Ferozepur.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner is Karamjit Singh s/o Kala Singh, however, in the FIR in question annexed as Annexure P-1, one Karamjit Singh s/o Raj Singh has been named as an accused, who along with others allegedly inflicted several injuries on the person of the complainant. Learned counsel has thus, asserted that it is obvious that he is innocent and has no concern whatsoever with the occurrence in question. A prayer, therefore, has been made to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

-23.

Notice of motion.

4.

On the asking of Court, Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record including the FIR in question. 6.

A perusal of the FIR in question clearly reveals that on the fateful day, all the accused including the petitioner came to the spot on motorcycles; they were armed with lethal weapons like kappa, sword and iron chains. On coming to the spot, they all attacked the injured, as a result of which, he suffered multiple injuries on his person. Learned State counsel has brought to the notice of this Court that when one of the accused Paramjit Singh was arrested, during his interrogation, he revealed the correct parentage of the petitioner. It has also been submitted that there is documentary evidence on record in the form of video footage wherein the petitioner is clearly visible along with the other accused.

Not only this, learned State counsel on instructions has submitted that the petitioner, who was armed with kappa, attacked the injured, as a result of which, one of his fingers was amputated; besides this, he also inflicted injuries on the back of the injured with the kappa. Learned State counsel has also submitted that the medical evidence of the injured corroborates the allegations levelled in the FIR in question.

7.

Prima facie, it appears to be a pre-mediated attack wherein all the accused came to the spot armed with lethal weapons and

-3thereafter, inflicted multiple injuries on the person of the injured. The petitioner has been attributed grievous injuries on the person of the injured.

8.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court does not deem it fit to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed.

9.

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.

18.03.2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) sonia JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No