Jagdish Singh Mansa v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-43955-2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

(219) 2023:PHHC:150275 CRM-M-43955-2023 Date of decision:- 24.11.2023 Jagdish Singh Mansa

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr.Prince Goyal, Advocate and Mr.Ravinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral) 1.

This 1st petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking grant of post-arrest bail in:- FIR No.

Dated Police Station Section 20.07.2023 City Fazilka, District Fazilka 384, 420, 406, 506 IPC 2.

Case of the prosecution is that FIR, Annexure P1, has been registered on the complaint of Sher Singh alleging therein that Jagdish Singh Mansa, (President, Kisan Majdoor Sangharsh Committee, Fazilka), present petitioner, and Kulwant Singh have duped him of Rs. 6 lacs. It has been alleged that after complainant's son Veer Singh expired, the accused helped the petitioner in getting the case FIR No.136 dated 05.07.2022 under Section 306/34 IPC registered against Harnek Singh and Labh Singh alias Labha at Police Station Sadar, Fazilka. The accused blackmailed the petitioner and on the pretext of getting the dispute settled, they took Rs.6 lacs from Harnek Singh on behalf of the complainant which they retained. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner are triable by a Magistrate. He submits that the investigation is complete and the challan has been presented. The petitioner who is in custody since 20.07.2023, deserves to SUDHIR KUMAR 2023.11.28 14:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document

CRM-M-43955-2023 be enlarged on bail. Still further, by reference to the affidavit (Annexure P4) dated 21.09.2023, he submits that the dispute has been compromised. 4.

State counsel on instructions from ASI-Mahinder Singh, submits that although the challan have been presented but the charges have not been framed. He submits that the petitioner has been named as an accused in this case and three other criminal cases were lodged against him for various offences under IPC.

5.

Counsel for the complainant has however supported the prayer made in the petition and affirmed the factum of settlement as well execution of affidavit by the complainant and his spouse. 6.

I have heard counsel for the parties and considered their respective submissions.

7.

It cannot be disputed that the petitioner is an accused of the offences which are triable by a Magistrate and on conclusion of investigation, challan has been presented. There is no apprehension that the petitioner, if enlarged on bail, is likely to abscond, delay the trial or influence the witnesses. Furthermore, the dispute seems to have been amicably settled with the complainant.

8.

In view of the above circumstances, this Court is prima facie of the view that the petitioner deserves to be released on bail. 9.

Without adverting to the merits or demerits of the arguments addressed by counsel for the parties, petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing adequate bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 10.

It is clarified that nothing said hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 24.11.2023 (SUVIR SEHGAL) Sd JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No.

SUDHIR KUMAR 2023.11.28 14:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document