Pirthi Singh And ANR v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh (I) CRM-M-49384-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 6.9.2021 Pirthi Singh and another ... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent (II) CRM-M-54837-2019 (O&M) Mandeep Singh @ Tikka ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. H.P.S.Ishar, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab, assisted by HC Jaswinder Singh.

(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing) ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral) 1.

This order shall dispose of the above mentioned two petitions wherein petitioners Pirthi Singh, Kulwinder Singh and Mandeep Singh @ Tikka, seek grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered vide FIR No. 142, dated 24.10.2019, Police Station Dayalpura,

CRM-M Nos.49384 & 54837 of 2019 - 2 - District Bathinda, under Sections 379-B, 353, 186, 332, 506, 341, 427, 148, 149 IPC.

2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Gurpreet Singh, driver of a State Government Bus, bearing registration No.PB-04V-4915 wherein it is alleged that on 20.10.2019 when he was driving bus and was proceeding from Chandigarh to Jaito, then about 12 to 15 persons waylaid them, who had come on 2 cars and 3 motorcycles and who were armed with deadly weapons and 'sticks', and who forced them to halt their bus. It is alleged that the said persons were under the influence of liquor and they snatched bag containing Rs.35,000/-, tickets and punch from the Conductor and also damaged the windowpanes.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is a delay of about 4 days in lodging the FIR and that there is no evidence worth credence to connect the petitioners with the alleged occurrence.

4.

Opposing, the petitions, learned State counsel has submitted that having regard to the serious nature of allegations, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Learned State counsel has however, informed that pursuant to interim directions issued in both the cases, the petitioners have since joined investigation. Learned State counsel has however, informed that one more case stands registered against the petitioners for offences under Sections 188, 160, 148, 149 of IPC. 5.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

CRM-M Nos.49384 & 54837 of 2019 - 3 - 6.

Having regard to the nature of offence and the fact that the petitioners who are being on interim bail since the last more than 1 year and 9 months, are not stated to have misused the concession of bail and have already joined investigation, their custodial interrogation is not warranted. The petitions, as such, are accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 16.12.2019 & 20.12.2019 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioners 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. 7.

A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of each connected case.

6.9.2021 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No