High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/30873/2020dismissed

Pargat Singh v. State Of Punjab

2020-10-08Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi2 pages

CRM No. M-30873-2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (214) CRM No. M-30873-2020 Date of Decision : 08.10.2020 PARGAT SINGH ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent (through video conferencing) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. Siddharth Sanwaria, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. *** Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) The 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. 53 dated 10.03.2020, under Sections 307, 353, 186, 323, 188, 148, 149 IPC read with Section 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not named in the FIR but has been subsequently roped in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner has nothing to do with the incident in respect of the allegations that the police party was attacked by group of persons, which included the petitioner as well. Learned counsel further submits that as the petitioner is behind the bars since 23.05.2020 though, the challan is yet to be submitted, he be extended NARESH KUMAR 2020.10.08 20:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No. M-30873-2020 the benefit of regular bail.

Learned State counsel submits that some of the accused persons are yet to be arrested and challan against the petitioner has already been submitted on 20.08.2020. Learned State counsel further submits that large numbers of weapons were recovered from the site, which was being occupied by the accused persons, after they had fled from the said site. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. Once, the co-accused of the petitioner are yet to be arrested and the charges are yet to be framed and the allegations, which have been alleged against the petitioner, are serious in nature as the police officials were attacked and injured by the accused persons, which allegedly included the petitioner.

Keeping in view the above facts, no ground is made out to grant the petitioner the benefit of regular bail at this stage. Dismissed.

October 08, 2020 ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) kanchan/naresh.k JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No NARESH KUMAR 2020.10.08 20:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh