Satnam Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 25.04.2022 Satnam Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. M.S. Bajwa, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, DAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Gurjit Singh.

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered against him vide DDR No.012 dated 20.06.2018 under Sections 323/324/379/148/149 IPC (Sections 307/326/325 IPC added later on) in FIR No.0038 dated 25.04.2018 at Police Station Bhindi Saidan, District Amritsar Rural, under Sections 307/452/323/324/148/149 IPC and Sections 25/27 Arms Act. 2.

At the time of issuance of notice of motion on 03.03.2022, the following order was passed:

"Case heard via video conferencing.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Rana Harjasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice at the asking of the Court on behalf of respondent-State. Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Vikas Arora, Advocate, appears on behalf of the complainant.

-2A copy of the petition be handed over to counsel for the respondent-State during the course of the day. Adjourned to 19.04.2022.

Simply looking at the age of the petitioner at this stage, which is shown to be 76 years, and the allegation against him being that he hit the complainant with the reverse side of the datar, and the case registered against him and his coaccused is as a cross-case to the FIR already registered, the petitioner would join investigation within one week. In case he is sought to be arrested, he would be released on bail, on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Ilaqa Magistrate. He shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

If the arresting officer does not join the petitioner in investigation, he would appear before the learned Ilaqa Magistrate immediately, who would then summon the arresting officer and direct him to join him in investigation, in terms of the order of this court.

A gazetted officer is directed to file a reply to the petition, specifically stating therein, as to which side is the aggressor party, as per investigation carried out so far and the exact role of the petitioner."

3.

Learned State counsel upon instructions has informed that pursuant to interim directions issued by this Court, the petitioner has since joined investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation and that he is not wanted in any other case.

4.

Having regard to the aforestated position, wherein the petitioner is stated to have joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required and otherwise has a clean record, the petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 03.03.2022 are hereby

-3made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

25.04.2022 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) VY JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No