← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/22466/2021allowed

Satnam Singh @ Satta v. State Of Punjab

2021-08-20Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri3 pages

THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CRM-M-22466-2021 (O&M).

Decided on: August 20, 2021.

Satnam Singh @ Satta .. Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab .. Respondent * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI * * * PRESENT Ms.Harpreet Maini, Advocate, for Mr.S.S.Maini, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Randhir Singh Thind, DAG, Punjab.

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (ORAL ) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking regular bail in FIR No.17 dated 1.2.2021, under Sections 379-B/34 of IPC (Section 201 of IPC added later on vide rapat No.41 dated 4.2.2021), registered at Police Station Kotkapura, District Faridkot.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is a case where the petitioner was falsely implicated and a perusal of the FIR

would show that the complainant himself has stated in the FIR that two persons had come and had snatched an amount of Rs.4,000/- from him who is a vegetable vendor and after three days, the complainant lodged the complaint alleging that said action was done by the petitioner and other person namely Ajay. He has submitted that the co-accused who is similarly situated namely Ajay has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide CRM-M-20728-2021 decided on 28.05.2021. He has submitted that so far as the present petitioner is concerned, he is not involved in any other case and is in custody since 02.02.2021 and the investigation of the case is already complete and no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner and after the presentation of challan even the charges have already been framed and since the trial of the case would take long time, the petitioner may be considered for the grant of regular bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that it is correct that the petitioner is in custody since 02.02.2021 and after completion of investigation, the challan has been presented and even charges have also been framed. It is not disputed by the State counsel that the petitioner is not involved in any other case and that there is no recovery to be effected from the petitioner.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Custody period of the petitioner is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner is not involved in any other case and the charges have already been framed in the present case. Furthermore, it is not the case of the State that in case the petitioner is released on bail then he

may influence any witness or tamper with evidence or may flee from justice. Therefore, keeping in view the totality of circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it fit and proper to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. It is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on merits of the case and is meant only for the purpose of decision of present petition. August 20, 2021.

(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No