Manpreet Singh @ Mannu v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 22.2.2022 Manpreet Singh @ Mannu .... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab, assisted by SI Harjit Singh.

Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate, for the complainant. (Proceedings conducted through video conferencing) ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No.20, dated 12.8.2021, Police Station GRP, Amritsar, under Sections 307, 379-B, 511 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act. 2.

The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Luvpreet Singh, wherein it is alleged that on 11.8.2021 when he was taking a walk in

- 2 - the evening, then 4 unidentified persons came upto him and told him to hand over whatever he was carrying. When the complainant stated that he was not carrying anything, then two of the said persons caught hold of complainant's arms while the 3rd one searched the complainant and took out his mobile. It is further alleged that one of the said persons was also brandishing a pistol and fired two shots towards him while leaving from the place of occurrence. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is nowhere named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that in any case the matter has now been amicably resolved amongst the parties.

4.

Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and has endorsed the factum of compromise. 5.

Learned State counsel has however, opposed the petition and has submitted that since the petitioner has been duly identified by the complainant in the police station, no case for grant of bail is made out. Learned State counsel has however, feigned ignorance about the alleged compromise. It has been informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars since the last about 6 months and 10 days and that he is not involved in any other case. 6.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 7.

Having regard to the nature of offence and the fact that the complainant has today admitted the factum of compromise and while also noticing that the petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of 6 months and 10 days and otherwise has a clean record,

- 3 - further detention of the petitioner will not be justified. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. 22.2.2022 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) Mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No