Jaskiran Singh @ Jaskaran Singh @ Jassa v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 16.09.2024 Jaskiran Singh @ Jaskaran Singh @ Jassa ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Kishan Garg, Advocate for Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Prabhdeep Singh Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.

***** FIR NO.

DATE POLICE STATION OFFENCES 27.03.2024 Nurpur Bedi, District Rupnagar 323, 397, 411, 458 IPC (Sections 379-B, 460 IPC and Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act added later on) GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J . (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in respect of aforementioned FIR. 2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Manoj Kumar Joshi, wherein it is alleged that he is running a confectionary & mobile shop in

- 2 - Noorpurbedi and he has kept a .22 bore licenced revolver for his defence. It is alleged that on 26.3.2024 when he was present at his shop at about 10:30 P.M. and was moving the goods inside the shop, then one person with muffled face came to his shop and went out and later came alongwith another 3-4 persons, who also had their faces muffled and two of them were carrying 'datars'. When the complainant objected to their being in his shop, one of those persons snatched his revolver and another two started hitting him on his head with 'datars' and snatched an amount of Rs.11,500/- from the pocket of his trousers. The complainant, however, managed to save himself by running away from his shop and raised alarm. It is further alleged that one of the persons also took away an amount of Rs.

8,000/- lying in the shop while running away from the spot. The complainant further stated therein that later he came to know that the car used by the said assailants was bearing registration No.PB-32-V-7376 (make K-10) and that the said persons were Sukhveer Singh, Jaskaran Singh @ Jassa, Amrik Singh and Jagdeep Singh @ Babbu. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although he is named in the FIR, but no specific role has been attributed to him. It has further been submitted that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars for the last more than 5 months and since the trial has not commenced till date, his further detention would not be justified.

- 3 - 4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel submitted that since name of the petitioner specifically figures in the FIR, no case for grant of bail is made out. Learned State counsel informed that although challan has bene presented but charges are yet to be framed. It has also been informed that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

5.

This Court has considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court.

6.

Without commenting anything as regards the veracity of the allegations levelled in the FIR, but keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been behind bars for the last more than 5 months and otherwise enjoys a clean record, his further detention would not be justified particularly when the trial has not even commenced till date. 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.

16.09.2024 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No