← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/47908/2017dismissed

Sukhwinder Singh @ Gaggu @ Gagandeep Singh @ Gaggi v. State Of Punjab

2018-03-12Mr. Justice Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon2 pages

CRM M-47908 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM M-47908 of 2017 Date of decision : 12.03.2018 Sukhwinder Singh @ Gaggu @ Gaggandeep Singh @ Gaggi ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Mohit Sadana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.A. Pathak, Additional A.G. Punjab.

RAJAN GUPTA J.

This is a petition under section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in a case registered against the petitioner under sections 302, 323, 148, 149 IPC vide FIR No. 94 dated 11.10.2016 at police station Sadar Sherpur, district Sangrur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that main injury leading to death of Harkishan Singh is not attributed to the petitioner. Besides, petitioner was not present at the spot at the time of incident. He was away to Nihal Singhwala district Moga. Learned State counsel has, however, opposed the plea. According to him, petitioner also caused injuries to Gamdoor Singh and at the back of Narain Singh with the stick (Sotta). According to him, petitioner is not entitled to concession of bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful though to the facts of the case.

FIR was lodged on the complaint of Gamdoor Singh. He alleged that main accused Karamjit Singh alongwith his accomplices has Ajay Kumar 2018.03.13 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document attacked the complainant side. He specifically alleged that Sukhwinder

CRM M-47908 of 2017 Singh (petitioner herein) had inflicted stick blows to Narain Singh and Gamdoor Singh. Gamdoor Singh has deposed as a witness by the prosecution while Narain Singh is yet to be examined. Stand of the State is that motive is attributed to the petitioner. As regards plea of alibi taken by the petitioner in the bail application, no opinion can be expressed on the same at this stage. Same can be examined on the basis of evidence to be led before the trial court. Under the circumstances, no case for enlarging the petitioner on bail is made out. Dismissed.

March 12, 2018 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Ajay Kumar 2018.03.13 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document