Vivek Kumar v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Date of Decision: 17.11.2017 Vivek Kumar ....Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA
Present:
Mr. Sahil Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner.
******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0134 dated 07.07.2017 registered for offences punishable under Section 394 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC") at Police Station Model Town, Ludhiana. (Offences punishable under Sections 411/148/149 IPC were added later on). The challan was presented under Sections 395/397/411/148/149 IPC and Sections 394/34 IPC were deleted. Heard.
Notice of motion.
On asking of the court, Mr. C.L. Pawar, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab, who is present in the Court accepts notice and submits that intimation by Registry informing of fixation of the petition has already been received and record of the case is available with him.
As per allegations in the FIR, three persons with muffled faces came on a motorcycle at about 08.40 p.m. on 06.07.2017 and snatched `20,000/- cash and foreign currency from complainant, who was going
-2home after closing his office. One of the assailants had given a datar blow on the head of complainant as a result of which his helmet got broken. They caused injuries to him and then fled away from the spot. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been arrested on the disclosure statement of accused in another case. Petitioner has not been got identified from complainant and except disclosure statement of accused recorded in another case, there is no other evidence to connect petitioner in this case.
Learned State counsel submits that one incident of snatching took place on 06.07.2017 regarding which present FIR was registered. Another incident took place on 15.08.2017 regarding which one more FIR bearing No. 179 was recorded on that day at Police Station Model Town. Munish, Pardeep and Avtar were arrested in that case and name of the petitioner cropped up in their disclosure statement. As per allegation in the FIR, three boys have come on a motorcycle, who had caused injuries to complainant and snatched his bag carrying cash. The petitioner has not been got identified from complainant so far. The police has named Munish, Pardeep and Avtar as accused in this case also. By including the name of petitioner number of accused swells to 4, while as per complainant only three boys have come at the spot.
In view of above but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and keeping in view the fact that conclusion of trial will take considerably long time, the present petition is allowed.
-3- (a) The petitioner shall comply with the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.
(b) In the event of his absence on any date of hearing, the benefit of bail allowed to the petitioner shall stand withdrawn. The trial Court shall be competent to cancel his bail bond and surety bond and proceed to procure his presence in accordance with law. In that eventuality the petitioner shall have to apply for bail afresh. (c) He shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.
November 17, 2017 ( SURINDER GUPTA ) jk JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No