Harpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27813-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.07.2022 HARPREET SINGH ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. SS Gill, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) Through this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.91 dated 14.05.2022, registered under Sections 379B and 120-B IPC, at Police Station Sadar Fazilka, District Fazilka. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been involved in the present case due to an old rivalry; that there is a delay of 7 days in lodging the present FIR; that the complainant is a photographer by profession; that on 23.01.2021, in the marriage of Sukhjinder Singh (brother of the petitioner), the work of photography/videography was assigned to the complainant; that though the entire payment of the said work was made to the complainant, yet he had got lodged the present false FIR and that the brother of the petitioner had moved a complaint dated 18.11.

2021 against the complainant to the SHO, Police Station Sadar, Fazilka, but till date no action has been taken upon the same. He further submits that co-accused, namely, Raj Rani (mother of the petitioner), has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 01.06.2022. AMAN JAIN 2022.07.

CRM-M-27813-2022 (O&M) -2I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. As per the contents of the FIR, on 07.05.2022, for a marriage function, the complainant, being photographer by profession, had hired one camera make Canan 80-D along with three batteries, one battery charger, two memory cards of 64GB, one LED light, along with other articles and packed the same in a bag. At about 6:15 p.m. when the complainant was waiting for his Helper, near GT Road FazilkaFerozepur, the petitioner along with his brother Sukhjinder Singh came there; snatched the bag from the complainant containing the aforesaid articles and had started beating him. Thereafter, a panchayat was conveyed between the parties but to no avail. The allegations against the petitioner are specific and serious in nature. The stolen articles are yet to be recovered. Thus, to unearth the truth, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. In view of the above, no ground is made out to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Dismissed.

26.07.2022 (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) Aman Jain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No AMAN JAIN 2022.07.28 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment