Gurmeet Singh v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:-2.12.2022 Gurmeet Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Impinder Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Siddharth Attri, AAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Karnail Singh.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.65, dated 5.4.2022, Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, under Sections 307, 323, 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act.

2.

The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Jaspreet Singh @ Jassu wherein it has been alleged that on the day of occurrence i.e. 05.04.2022, when he alongwith his brother Sukhpreet Singh was present near bus stand, Village Fatehpur Mania, then they noticed a white coloured Swift car bearing registration No.PB04-A-4582 in which 4 persons were sitting. When they reached near the said car, all of them got out of the car. It has been alleged that Navkiran Singh was armed a pistol, Anmol Singh Maan was carrying an

( 2 ) iron rod, Gurmeet Singh Brar was also armed with iron rod while the 4th one was an unknown person. It is alleged that Navkiran Singh raised a lalkara exhorting his companions not to spare the complainant and his brother. Thereafter, Anmol Singh Maan gave a blow with iron rod hitting on the complainant's forehead. Gurmeet Singh Brar gave a blow with iron rod hitting the rear side of complainant's head. Navkiran Singh fired from his pistol which hit the right thigh of the complainant. When the complainant's brother Sukhpreet tried to rescue him, then all of the accused gave beatings to complainant's brother as well. When the complainant and his brother raised alarm, the accused ran away from the spot. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner is attributed a blow with an iron rod on the rear side of head of the complainant, the co-accused Navkiran Singh had fired at the injured with a pistol. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter, in any case, stands amicably resolved amongst the parties and that the petitioner otherwise enjoys a clean record.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioner had inflicted a blow on a vital part i.e. head of the injured, no case for grant of bail is made out.

5.

Mr. Jagmeet Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and has filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the complainant has endorsed the factum of compromise and has submitted that he has no objection for grant of bail to the petitioner. 6.

In view of the aforestated position, wherein the matter is stated to have amicably resolved between the parties, the petition is accepted and the

( 3 ) 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.

2.12.2022 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No