Amandeep Singh Alias Amanpreet Singh Alias Jangi v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

(206) Date of Decision: October 07, 2020 Amandeep Singh @ Amanpreet Singh @ Jangi .. Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .. Respondent (Through video conferencing) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:

Mr. Mohinder Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J.(ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in respect of FIR No.33 dated 14.02.2019 under Sections 307, 34 IPC read with Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act (Section 201 IPC and Section 30 of the Arms Act added later on) registered at Police Station Division 'B' Police Commissionerate Amritsar, Amritsar City, Punjab.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that no injury has been attributed to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though in the FIR, it has been mentioned that the petitioner had hit Sh. Mandeep Singh, who had intervened to stop the fight but no MLR was got done as said Mandeep Singh did not suffer any injury. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the allegations in the FIR are yet to be proved and only the injury, which has been inflicted upon Jaspreet Singh is attributed to Gangandeep Singh co-accused.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, keeping in view the service of advance copy of petition, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State concedes that no injury has been found to be attributed to the petitioner as no MLR of Mandeep Singh was got done.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. Once it is conceded that no injury has been caused by the petitioner and only injury suffered by Jaspreet Singh has been attributed to co-accused Gagandeep Singh and in respect of the allegation that the petitioner was carrying countrymade pistol, the same is yet to be proved as the same was not recovered.

Further, as per the averments made in the petition, the parties have also compromised the matter in order to live peacefully. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances noted above, the petitioner has made out a case for the grant of regular bail as the challan has already been presented and the trial is likely to take some time.. In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits of the case, it is directed that the petitioner be released on regular bail, subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate concerned. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that petitioner will not influence trial in any manner including influencing the witnesses

and in case of default of the above undertaking, State will be at liberty to approach this Court for passing appropriate orders. However, it is made clear that anything observed herein shall not be construed to be an expression of any opinion on the merits of the case.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) October 07, 2020 JUDGE harsha/naresh.k Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No