Sukhwinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 26.09.2024 

 
....Petitioner(s)

Versus

 



...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present :

Mr. Yashpal Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ankit Grewal, DAG Punjab.

***** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 CrPC for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the following case :- FIR No.

Dated Sections Police Station 15.02.2024 324 and 34 IPC;

(326 IPC added later on) Chhajli, District Sangrur no. 2), Mo 2.

It is, inter alia, contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2024. He contends that the alleged injury attributed to the petitioner is on the non-vital part of the body. After the completion of investigation, challan has already been presented in

-2Court and he is not required for further investigation in the matter. Thus prayed for grant of concession of bail to the petitioner. 3.

Per contra, learned State counsel while referring to the reply dated 31.07.2024 submitted by the State has opposed the petition on the ground that the petitioner had caused grievous injury on the left wrist of the complainant, and as such, he does not deserve the concession of bail. 4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5.

After considering the rival contentions and perusing the record, it transpires that as per the allegations levelled in the FIR, the injury attributed to the petitioner happens to be on the left wrist of the complainant, which was later found to be grievous in nature. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2024, and after the completion of investigation, challan has already been presented in Court. The conclusion of trial in the present case, triable by the Court of Magistrate, will take sufficient long time to ascertain the criminal liability, if any, of the petitioner. In the circumstances, no purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner any longer.

6.

Consequently, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Judge on Duty/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case; undertaking to regularly appear on each and every date; not to leave the country without prior permission of the Court; and not to tamper with evidence of prosecution in any manner.

-37.

Any observation made above shall not be construed as opinion of this Court on the merits of the case.

8.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 26.09.2024 S.Sharma(syr) i) Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No ii) Whether reportable?

Yes/No