High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/47354/2019dismissed

Baljit Singh v. State Of Punjab

2020-09-25Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi2 pages

CRM-M-47354-2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

(202) CRM-M-47354-2019 Date of Decision: September 25, 2020 Baljit Singh .. Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .. Respondent (Through video conferencing) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:

Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J.(ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in respect of FIR No.88 dated 26.08.2018 under Sections 458, 380, 323, 342 IPC (Sections 460 and 201 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Sadar Sangrur, District Sangrur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the allegations against the petitioner are false and the petitioner has wrongly been roped in the present FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the challan has already been presented and the charges have already been framed and therfore, keeping the petitioner behind the bars will serve no useful purpose. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that the charges against the petitioner in the present FIR are serious in nature and one person has lost life in the incident. Learned counsel for the respondentNARESH KUMAR 2020.09.26 14:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-47354-2019 State further submits that there are other FIRs also registered against the petitioner for the similar acts which shows that he is a habitual offender. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. The allegations against the petitioner are very serious. The Government property was being stolen and the employees guarding the property were being beaten up and one of the guard died in the said act. Further, the petitioner is also involved in many similar acts due to which other FIRs have been registered against him. Not only this, after the registeration of the present FIR No.08 on 26.08.2018, petitioner indulged in the similar acts for which FIRs No.117 and 143 were registered on 15.10.2018 and 02.09.

2018 at police station Ghal Khurd, District Ferozepur and police station Sadar Dhuri, District Sangrur, respectively. That being so, once the petitioner is a habitual offender and has allegedly committed similar acts subsequent to the allegations alleged in the present FIR and the trial is at a stage where the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined, no ground is made out for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) September 25, 2020 JUDGE harsha/naresh.k Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No NARESH KUMAR 2020.09.26 14:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh