High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/18575/2020allowed

Paramjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

2020-07-28Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (201-A) Date of Decision : 28.07.2020 Paramjit Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. K.G. Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.P.S. Tinna, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. *** Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) The petition has been taken for hearing through video conference due to Covid-19 pandemic.

The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 22 dated 27.02.2020, under Sections 323, 324, 341, 452, 148, 149 IPC (Sections 326, 354, 427 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Begowal, District Kapurthala.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has joined investigation in terms of order passed by this Court dated 13.07.2020. Order dated 13.07.2020 is as under:- "The petition has been taken for hearing through video conference due to Covid-19 pandemic.

The present petition has been filed under Section

438 Cr.P.C. for the grant of anticipatory bail in respect of FIR No. 22 dated 27.02.2020, under Sections 323, 324, 341, 452, 148, 149 IPC (Sections 326, 354, 427 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Begowal, District Kapurthala. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner has been attributed a danda blow resulting in an injury, which has been declared as simple injury and as nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the concession of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argues that co-accused namely, Mohinder Singh and Bhupinder Singh, against whom, similar allegations were alleged, have already been granted concession of anticipatory bail by this Court while passing order in CRM-M16995 of 2020 on 01.07.2020. Notice of motion for 28.07.2020.

Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab,who has joined the proceedings through video conference, keeping in view the service of advance copy of petition accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. Learned State counsel has not disputed that as per FIR, the petitioner has only been attributed a danda blow resulting in simple injury. Learned State counsel has further conceded that similarly situated co-accused have already been granted concession of anticipatory bail by this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. It is not disputed that the petitioner has been attributed a danda blow resulting in simple injury and co-accused, against whom, similar allegations were alleged, have already been granted concession of anticipatory bail by this Court. Once,

learned State counsel has not been able to point out any distinguishable fact between the petitioner and co-accused Mohinder Singh, the concession of anticipatory bail cannot be denied to the petitioner on the ground of parity. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to join and cooperate in the investigation. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation forthwith. In the event of his arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer subject to the following conditions:- (i) That he shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required.

(ii) That he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the said facts to the Court or to any police officer.

(iii) That he shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

(iv) That he shall abide by all the conditions as enshrined under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

To be heard with CRM-M-16995 of 2020."

Learned State counsel, who has also joined the proceedings through video conference, on instructions from ASI Daljit Singh, Police Station Begowal states that in terms of the order of this Court reproduced before, the petitioner has joined the investigation and no further interrogation is required.

In view of the above, the order dated 13.07.2020 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute.

However, the petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. He shall also join investigation as and when called upon to do so.

In case at any given point of time hereinafter, it is felt by the Investigating Agency that petitioner is required for the investigation but is not co-operating, it will be at liberty to approach this Court for passing appropriate orders.

The petition stands disposed of.

July 28, 2020 ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) kanchan/naresh.k JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes Whether reportable?