← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/15233/2024allowed

Bhupinder Singh Alias Bhinda v. State Of Punjab

2024-05-29Mr. Justice Pankaj Jain2 pages

CRM-M-15233-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-15233-2024 Date of decision : 29.05.2024 BHUPINDER SINGH ALIAS BHINDA ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. J.S. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R. No.42 dated 05.03.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 160 of IPC, 1860 and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 307, 201 of IPC added later on) at Police Station Beas, District Amritsar Rural. 2.

Custody Certificate of the petitioner has been filed today in Court. The same is taken on record.

3.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR came into being on the basis of secret information w.r.t. a fight between two warring factions and the petitioner is stated to have fired at Pritpal Singh. Though even as per the FIR both the parties fired at each other. Petitioner is behind bars for Deepak Kumar 2024.05.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-15233-2024 more than 7 months and 16 days. Challan already stands presented and thus there can't be any apprehension that the petitioner shall tamper with the evidence.

4.

State Counsel is not in position to dispute the factual assertions made by counsel for the petitioner based on record. 5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through records of the case.

6.

Without commenting on the merits of the case, keeping in view the incarceration already suffered by the petitioner and the fact that the investigation already stands concluded and Challan stands presented, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

7.

Needless to say that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. May 29, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Deepak Kumar 2024.05.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document