Baljeet Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:24.05.2019 Baljeet Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ

Present:

Mr. Kulwant Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, DAG, Punjab.

*** MANOJ BAJAJ, J.(ORAL) Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.85 dated 03.04.2019, under Section 326 IPC, registered at Police Station Sahnewal, District Ludhiana.

The FIR was registered on the basis of the statement of complainant Narinder Singh son of Khushkaran Singh, which reads as under:- "Statement of Narinder Singh son of Khushkaran Singh, resident of Backside Gurudwara Sahib, Village Kanganwal Ludhiana aged about 34 years, Mobile No.8847624932. Stated that I am a resident of above address and I used to do the work of construction of sheds in the factories. Baljit Singh son of Joginder

-2Singh, resident of Village Kanganwala, District Ludhiana had also been doing the work of labourer with me for the last one and half year. But in these days the said Baljit Singh was sitting idle for the last about one month. My brother-in-law Harpinder Singh son of Bahadur Singh and my mother-in-law had come to meet me and my brother-in-law has quarreled with Baljit Singh about 2-3 months back. On 2.4.2019 at about 8.30 PM the aforesaid Baljit Singh had come in front of our house and he started abusing and then I had gone to his house to drop him. When we reached near the house of Baljit Singh, then he gave me a push blow due to which my head struck against the wall and I had received injuries on my head. Thereafter, the aforesaid Baljit Singh started scuffling with me and he had given a bite on my left thumb.

Due to which the bone of any left thumb was fractured, and the aforesaid Baljit Singh had fled away from the spot while threatening me of dire consequences. After then I was taken to Civil Hospital Sahnewal by the son of my uncle, where treatment was also taken and also got the MLR/HPS/189/MLC prepared which has been produced before your goodself. Legal action be taken against him. Statement has been got recorded same has been read over and explained to me, which is true and correct.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and the petitioner is in custody since 03.04.2019. He further contends that the matter in dispute has been compromised between the parties. He also contends that the conclusion of trial will take long time as the challan has not yet been filed. On the other hand, learned State counsel assisted by ASI Harpal Singh has opposed the bail application. It is not disputed that the petitioner and the complainant belong to the same locality and the matter has now been compromised between them.

Considering the above background and the trial is likely to take some time, further detention of the petitioner may not be justified. Therefore, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the

-3case, it is ordered that the petitioner be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned.

The petition is allowed.

24.05.2019 (MANOJ BAJAJ) sheetal JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No