Yakub @ Kaka v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH Date of decision:17.6.2020 YAKUB @ KAKA .....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:
Mr. Dinesh Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Samina Dhir, DAG, Punjab.
(the aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since the proceedings are being conducted in Virtual Court) **** GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking grant of regular bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No.10 dated 23.1.2020 under Sections 458, 365, 323, 506, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Sadar, District Pathankot
2. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Roshandeen wherein it has been alleged that on 23.1.2020 he bolted the room from inside and he as well as other members of the family went to sleep. However, later the door of the room was opened and Kaka @ Yakub (petitioner) entered holding 'Takua', alongwith Sher Ali who was holding 'Kirpan', Shamdin @ Shamu holding 'Datar' and Kalu empty handed as well as 3-4 unknown persons. It is alleged that Kaka @ Yakub gave a blow with
( 2 ) 'Takua' on his head from its reverse side while Sher Ali gave a blow with 'Dang' on his nose. Gaggu is stated to have given a blow from the reverse side of 'Kirpan' on the left eye-brow of the complainant, Shabir is stated to have caused an injury from the reverse of 'Kirpan' on the left elbow and Shamdhin @ Shamu gave a blow with 'Datar' on the left elbow of the complainant, another unknown persons is stated to have given a blow with stick on the shoulder of the complainant. It is further alleged that said accused also caused injuries to his wife namely Janu and his son namely Romu. The complainant has alleged that thereafter Sher Ali @ Sheru, Sham Din @ Shamu and Sabhir went into the room of his daughter-Masuma and took her away forcibly.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the present case and that in fact it is a case where complainant's daughter-Masuma had solemnized marriage with petitioner's cousin namely Sher Ali against the wishes of her parents i.e. complainant and others and thereafter complainant's daughter along with Sher Ali had approached this Court seeking protection apprehending threat to their lives from the complainant and others as would be evident from order dated 11.4.2019 (Annexure P-2)
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that subsequently on account of some minor matrimonial discord after about 3 months between Masuma and her husband-Sher Ali, said Masuma returned back to her parental home but thereafter again joined the company of her husband. It has been submitted that the present FIR has been lodged by Masuma's father simply to settle scores with Sher Ali by falsely
( 3 ) implicating other members of his family including the petitioner who happens to be cousin of Sher Ali.
5. Opposing the petition, the learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioner has been specifically named in the FIR, no case for grant of bail is made out. It has however been informed that the petitioner has been behind bars since last about 5 months and that the injury attributed to the petitioner is a simple injury.
6. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.
7. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances and bearing in mind that injury attributed to the petitioner is simple and the petitioner has been behind bars since last 5 months, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose as conclusion of trial is likely to take some time.
8. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) 17.6.2020 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?
Yes / No Whether reportable?
Yes / No