Pritam Singh v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:-23.12.2021 Pritam Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Umesh Kumar Kanwar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harbir Sandhu, AAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Gulaab Singh.

(proceedings conducted through video conferencing) ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) 1.

The petitioner Pritam Singh aged 74 years has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.123 dated 10.10.2021 at Police Station Sadar Raikot, District Ludhiana under Sections 326-A and 149 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Charan Singh, wherein it is alleged that on the day of occurrence, when he was proceeding to Gurdwara Sahib, Logal Patti, Noorpur and was present near Kamal Cycle Repair Shop, then Jagjit Singh @ Pappu and Bhola were already present there. It is alleged that Jagjit Singh @ Pappu told Bhola to give a spray on complainant's face. Although the complainant tried to flee away on his bicycle but Bhola poured

( 2 ) acid on his back. When complainant reached near the sweet shop, he found Pritam Singh standing there, who called Kali Singh while another two unknown persons with muffled faces were already standing there and Pritam Singh exhorted them by saying that the complainant be not spared. It is alleged that the said persons were also carrying spray bottles and Pritam Singh told them to spray on complainant's face. However, the complainant managed to escape on his bicycle. Later when his son took out complainant's shirt, it was noticed that the complainant's back had sustained burn injuries and even his leg above knee had been burnt.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is some dispute between two families pertaining to a transaction for purchase of a tractor and on account of which the entire family of the petitioner has been involved. It has been submitted that the petitioner is aged 74 years and is not attributed any overt act other than that he had exhorted Kali Singh and others not to spare the complainant.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that since the allegations stand substantiated from medical evidence inasmuch as burn injures were found on the person of the complainant, no case for grant of bail is made out. Learned State counsel has, however, been informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars since the last about 21⁄2 months and that challan already stands presented and that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

5.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 6.

Having regard to the age of the petitioner and his clean antecedents and that challan already stands presented, further detention of the petitioner will not

( 3 ) serve any useful purpose. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

23.12.2021 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No