Karanbir Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 06.07.2021 Karanbir Singh and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
! "
# $ ! !!
% ! $ " !&'() *+ , -.
,-/! " 01"2 %% 3,33,*3,4+.+/ '# 5 " ""! $"-.
-4 ,-/1 &'(1 ! , -.
,-/ " 4* ' 1 ""!"
" ) ,""!"
1 "" "1 ) 3""!"
! "1" 1
, ! "! "1$ " 1 "" ' ) 3 !"
"" """ ! " Learned State counsel, assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant, opposes the prayer made in the present petition and submits that the petitioners alongwith co-accused had caused multiple injuries on the person of the complainant. However, it is not disputed that injury attracting Section 326 IPC has not been attributed to the petitioners. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Vide order dated 14.12.2020 passed by this Court, this Court had directed that no coercive action should be taken against the petitioners. It is conceded by the learned State counsel that injury attracting Section 326 IPC has not been attributed to the petitioners.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds that the petitioners are not required for custodial interrogation and no useful purpose would be served by sending them behind the bars. Therefore, finding merit in the present petition, the same is allowed. The petitioners are directed to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and if they are sought to be arrested, they shall be released on anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions as envisaged in Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
It is made clear that if pursuant to and in compliance with this
3 order, the petitioners do not cooperate with the investigating agency, the investigating agency would be liberty to move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail.
$ 6 7$!8 97) 6 "8 97)