Amritpal Singh And ANR v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 27.7.2020 Amritpal Singh and another ... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Nandan Jindal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Randeep Singh Khaira, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Amrinderjit Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the complainant. (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 petitioners seek grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered against them vide FIR No.57 dated 14.5.2020 under Sections 379-B/34 IPC at Police Station Tallewal, District Barnala.

2. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Sukhdev Singh, wherein it has been alleged that he is managing 'Jabji Filling Station, Behlan', where Sukhjit Singh is working as a salesman. It is alleged that on 13.5.2020 four young boys came in a swift car and snatched `3,000/- from the salesman and fled away from the spot. It is further alleged that subsequently upon making inquiries, it came to be known that car bearing registration No.PB-08-

TM6632 belonged to Amritpal Singh and that the other boys, who were sitting in the car, were Jaswant Singh, Damanpreet Singh and Sukhwant Singh @ Lovy, who had all committed offence in connivance with each other.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case and that the matter, in any case, stands amicably resolved amongst the parties. It has further been submitted that a co-accused namely Sukhwant Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 11.6.2020 (Annexure P-3).

4. Today, Mr. Amrinderjit Singh Sandhu, Advocate, who is appearing on behalf of the complainant, has admitted the factum of compromise and has stated that he has no objection in case the petitioners are granted bail.

5. The learned State counsel has, however, opposed the petition while submitting that the petitioners are involved in two other cases.

6. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

7. Keeping in view that it is a case of snatching of a petty amount of `3,000/- and the matter is stated to have been compromised amongst the parties and also that the co-convict Sukhwant Singh, who is identically situated, has already been released on anticipatory bail, this Court is of the opinion that the concesssion of regular bail can be extended to the petitioners.

8. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the

satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

27.7.2020 (Gurvinder Singh Gill) kamal Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No