Ranjeet Singh v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-17112-2022 Date of decision : 25.08.2022 Ranjeet Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent/State.

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 FIR No.649 dated 20th of September, 2021 registered for the offenses punishable under Sections 323, 201, 307, 34, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Assandh, District Karnal.

2.

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

3.

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the role of the petitioner even as per FIR is that he was driving the motorcycle when the complainant was fired at by the co-accused. It has been stated that the petitioner is in custody since 27th of September, 2021. Co-accused namely Satnam Singh has already been granted concession of regular bail by a DEEPAK KUMAR 2022.08.25 05:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-17112-2022 -2Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M No.8995 of 2022 vide order dated 24th of May, 2022.

4.

Ld. State Counsel is not in position to dispute the fact that the shot has not been attributed to the petitioner. 5.

As per the allegations in the FIR, while complainant was coming out of a barber shop he was fired at by one of the riders of the motor-cycle. The shot hit him on the right elbow. It has come up during the investigation that co-accused Amanpreet, who was the pillion rider on the motorcycle being driven by the petitioner fired shot with the countrymade pistol. The pistol already stands recovered on the disclosure statement made by Satnam Singh. The petitioner is in custody since 27th of September, 2021. The investigation already stands completed. No overt act has been attributed to the petitioner.

5.

Thus, in view the aforesaid facts & circumstances and keeping in view the long incarceration already suffered by the petitioner, he is held to be entitled for concession of regular bail. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

August 25, 2022 (PANKAJ JAIN) Dpr JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR 2022.08.25 05:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document