Gurdeep Singh & ORS v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-32909 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:27.9.2016 Gurdeep Singh and another

...Petitioners

v.

State of Punjab

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. J.S. Bhandohal, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Shivali, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. Rajbir Singh, Advocate for the complainant. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.91 dated 14.6.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 307, 326, 325, 324, 323, 148, 149, 447, 511 and 506 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act at Police Station Sadar Sangrur, District Sangrur.

Notice of motion has been issued in this case. Ms. Shivali, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Rajbir Singh, learned Advocate has appeared for the complainant and contested this petition. Police record is also available.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondentHarpal Singh Parmar 2016.09.28 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-32909 of 2016 [2] State and learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners prays that the petitioner No.1-Gurdeep Singh may be allowed to withdraw this petition at this stage. The petition for bail qua petitioner No.1-Gurdeep Singh is dismissed as withdrawn at this stage.

As regards, petitioner No.2-Shingara Singh, I find that he was stated to be armed with a `Kirpan' and gave a blow on the right leg of Randhir Singh, which injury given with `Kirpan' on the leg is on non-vital part of the body. The petitioner No.2 has been in custody since 21.7.2016. Petitioner No.2-Shingara Singh is not required for investigation or interrogation purpose. The trial of the case will take a long time. No useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner No.2 in custody till the disposal of the case.

Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed qua petitioner No.2-Shingara Singh and he is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `40,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

September 27, 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.09.28 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh