Jaswinder Singh @ Khattu v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-44987 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 08, 2017 Jaswinder Singh @ Khattu

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Bipan Ghai, Senior Advocate with Mr.Paras Talwar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Deep Singh, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr.Ajaivir Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.34 dated 27.02.2013 under Sections 302, 307, 427, 506, 148, 149, 120-B, 201, 336, 465, 468, 471 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Mataur, District Mohali.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant appeared and contested the petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. Vineet Gulati 2017.03.10 09:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-44987 of 2016 -2Though, it is a case under Section 302 IPC and the petitioner is stated to be present on the spot and attribution is also that he fired shot from the pistol while running away from the spot but as per prosecution version and as also admitted at the time of arguments, the shot fired by the present petitioner did not hit anybody but only hit the car. Learned State counsel stated that the car and pistol have been recovered from the accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that as the car was left by the accused on the spot and in the car, registration certificate was in the name of Ranjit Singh i.e. father of petitioner, therefore, in the FIR, the petitioner's name has not been mentioned, rather, he is named as 'son of Ranjit Singh'.

The petitioner is in custody since 03.03.2013 i.e. for the last more than four years and the material witnesses have already been examined and now there is no chance of tampering with the evidence and the trial of the case will take long time.

Keeping in view the custody period and the fact that present petitioner has not caused any injury to anybody, without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find merit in the present petition and the same is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds in the sum of `50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. March 08, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2017.03.10 09:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh