Amanpreet Singh Alias Pannu v. The State Of Punjab

CRM-M-20702-2024 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20702-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.08.2024 Amanpreet Singh @ Pannu

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Ms. Renu Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sahil K. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab.

**** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

Through the instant petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. the petitioner prays for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.202 dated 22.12.2019, Under Sections 379-B, 34, 201 of IPC and 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar Rural, Punjab. 2.

Short reply by way of affidavit of Surinderpal, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Kartarpur, Jalandhar (Rural), on behalf of the respondent-State, has been filed in Court and the same is taken on record.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations against the petitioner are that he along with co-accused persons committed an act of snatching at petrol pump and took away Rs. 28,000/- from the

CRM-M-20702-2024 (O&M) 2 employee of the petrol pump along with one mobile phone. The petitioner and another co-accused were arrested in another case FIR No. 233 dated 22.12.2019, registered under Sections 395, 379-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Bhogpur, Jalandhar (Rural) and therein they suffered a confession regarding the commission of offence as alleged in the instant FIR. Thereupon, they were also taken into custody in the instant FIR, although, no recovery was effected from them qua the instant case. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is asking for the relief of regular bail in the instant FIR, though the petitioner has criminal antecedents, however, he has suffered incarceration about 10 months. She further submits that except the disclosure, there is no sufficient inculpatory evidence with the prosecution connecting the petitioner with the crime in question.

5.

That earlier the petitioner was granted the relief of regular bail, however, due to non-appearance before the trial Court, he was declared as a proclaimed offender on 15.11.2022 and finally, he was arrested on 20.02.2024 and till date he is behind bar.

6.

Learned State counsel opposeses the grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that he is involved in 12 more cases. He further submits that since earlier also he absconded from the trial and now he will also abscond, in case he is granted the concession of bail. 7.

I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties concerned and I am of the view that the instant petition deserves to be allowed as the petitioner has suffered incarceration about 10 months, though the petitioner is involved in other cases also,

CRM-M-20702-2024 (O&M) 3 however, considering the nature of offence committed in the instant FIR, coupled with the fact that the trial is at the initial stage, which is not likely to conclude in near future, this Court deems it fit and appropriate to extend the benefit of regular bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the present petition is allowed.

8.

The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing of heavy bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate/trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 9.

However, anything observed here-in-above shall have no effect on the merits of the case and is meant for deciding the present petition only. 29.08.2024 (KULDEEP TIWARI) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No