Satnam Singh @ Sattu v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: November 14th, 2024 Satnam Singh alias Sattu .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Rahi Mehra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) This is a second petition filed by the petitioner seeking the concession of regular bail in case FIR No.114 dated 10.11.2021 registered under Sections 395, 458, 341, 324, 412, 201, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 25(6) of the Arms Act, at Police Station Chohla Sahib, District Tarn Taran.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the petitioner has been in custody since 13.06.2022, however, till date the trial is underway and hence, he deserves to be extended the concession of bail. It has also been argued by the learned counsel that the petitioner was not nominated in the FIR in question and came to be nominated subsequently in the disclosure statement allegedly suffered by co-accused Karan Kumar. It has been asserted that the evidentiary value of the disclosure statement is of a weak nature and hence, the petitioner on this ground also deserves to be extended the concession of bail.

-23.

In compliance of order dated 12.09.2024, learned State counsel has placed on record a copy of the disclosure statement of co-accused Karan Kumar. Learned State counsel has, on instructions, submitted that the disclosure statement of co-accused Karan Kumar is in sync with the allegations levelled in the FIR in question because it has been categorically alleged that there were four persons, who barged into the shop of the complainant and after inflicting injuries on him with datar, and taking his family members as hostage, looted and decamped with a huge amount of money and gold ornaments. Learned State counsel has, on further instructions, controverted the submissions made by the counsel opposite qua the stage of trial.

He submits that the trial is nearing completion as all the prosecution witnesses stand examined and the case is now fixed for recording statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. Hence, in all likelihood, the trial would be concluding very shortly. In addition, learned State counsel has placed on record the custody certificate of the petitioner and submitted that a perusal of the same reveals that the petitioner has previous criminal antecedents and has been involved in identical crimes; the petitioner was also declared a proclaimed offender earlier, for which an FIR under Section 174-A of the IPC has been registered against him.

Learned State counsel has submitted that a recovery of 191⁄2 grams of stolen gold was affected from the petitioner pursuant to his own disclosure statement along with the motorcycle used in the commission of the crime.

-3witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution during trial and keeping in view the stage of the trial, in case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood that he could abscond, hence, the present petition be dismissed.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record.

5.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court is not inclined to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. 6.

However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

November 14th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No