Sarabjit Singh @ Chhaba Kabaria v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 28.05.2025 Sarabjit Singh @ Chabba Kabaria

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE


Present :

Mr. B. D. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. ****


 , J. (Oral) 1.

  



 

   



       

  !"# $%  %$$   

 &'&'(")* '+     )    

,-  .  /0   #  /

1 )2'

$ 2.

The case of the prosecution is that the FIR was registered on the complaint of one Baljit Kaur alleging that on 24.04.2024 at about 8:00 PM, her husband was returning from his work and when he reached outside the main gate of the house, Sonu son of Harbans Singh armed with Kirch, Brother of Sonu, Chhaba Kabaria, nephew of Sonu namely Arsh, husband of sister of Sonu namely Debi and one unidentified person were standing in front of the gate. Said Arsh raised lalkara to catch hold of husband of the complainant and teach him lesson regarding dispute of partition of house. Sonu gave several blows of Kirch on Jaila, husband of complainant and out of which four blows of Kirch landed on his chest, two blows hit on his ribs of chest, on blow of Kirch hit on his right wrist, one blow of kirch hit on

right leg and one blow hit on backside of his thigh. In the pool of blood, he fell down on the ground, then Chhaba and Debi gave kick blows and fist blows and an unidentified person dragged him. When complainant and her son Satbir Singh raised hue and cry, all the assailants fled away from the spot. Complainant and her son arranged the vehicle and took him Govt. Hospital, Majitha, where doctor concerned referred him to Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, where doctor concerned declared him dead. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is an unexplained delay of one day in registration of FIR and nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and as such, his custodial interrogation is not necessary. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. M.. S. Toor, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice and opposed the bail petition. Learned State counsel submits that injured/deceased Jaila Singh suffered as many as 10 injuries.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

7.

There have been specific allegations that the petitioner was also part of the attacking party and all the accused in connivance with each other caused multiple injuries on the person of husband of complainant and petitioner has also gave kick blows and fist blows on the person of deceased during the said attack and in the said occurrence, the husband of the complainant succumbed to the injuries.

8.

In view of the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, no ground is made out to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly, the present petition is hereby dismissed. (
 ) 

 28.05.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No