Jagroop Singh v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 05.08.2024 Jagroop Singh .... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Amandeep Singh Manaise, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Inderjeet Singh Ladher, DAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Dilbag Singh.

***** FIR NO.

DATE POLICE STATION OFFENCES 03.03.2024 Ghuman Kalan, District Gurdaspur 325, 326, 341, 323, 148, 149 IPC GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J . (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of aforementioned FIR. 2.

At the time of issuance of interim bail the following order was passed on 24.04.2024:

"The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.7, dated 3.3.2024 at Police

- 2 - Station Ghuman Kalan, District Gurdsapur, under Sections 325, 326, 341, 323, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code. The FIR was lodged at the instance of Jarnail Singh, wherein it is alleged that Jagroop Singh and Prabhjot Singh, who were armed with 'datar', Gulab Singh, Manga Singh, Amritpal Singh, Happy, who are all carrying sticks/dang and Saila, who was empty handed, encircled the complainant, his brother Karnail Singh and his nephew Ranjit Singh and caused injuries to them with their respective weapons. While Karnail Singh as per MLR (Annexure P-2) sustained as many as 5 injuries, the complainant Jarnail Singh is stated to have received 6 injuries.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case apparently to pressurize all the members of accused party as the petitioner is employed in a government department. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, as a matter of fact, on the given day the petitioner was present in his office as would be evident from the biomertic attendence record (Annexure P-3), which shows that the petitioner had arrived in his office at 9.06 A.M. and had left his office at 6:31 P.M. on 1.3.2024. It has been submitted that the petitioner has a clean record and is not involved in any other case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in case the call-detail record and tower location record in respect of mobile phone of the petitioner is collected, the same would clearly establish that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence.

Notice of motion for 5.8.2024.

- 3 - Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C." 3.

Learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation but has not cooperated inasmuch as he has not got the recovery of bullet motorcycle effected.

4.

This Court has considered the rival submissions. 5.

The petitioner admittedly has joined investigation. Non-recovery of the aforesaid bullet motorcycle cannot be made a ground for declining the petition. The petition, as such, is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 24.04.2024 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

05.08.2024 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) Mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No