Deba @ Sukhdev Masih v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH **** CRM-M-63878-2023 Date of Decision: 21.02.2024 2024:PHHC: 024467 DEBA @ SUKHDEV MASIH . . . . PETITIONER Vs.

STATE OF PUNJAB . . . . RESPONDENT **** CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA **** Present: - Mr. Amarjeet Singh Prajapati, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Amandeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.

**** DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

Prayer in this petition filed under Section 438 CrPC is to grant anticipatory bail in case FIR No.24 dated 09.05.2023 (Annexure P1) registered under Sections 307/353/186/332/224/225/148/149 IPC and Section 61 of the Excise Act at Police Station Kotli Surat Mallian, District Gurdaspur.

2.

Specific contention was raised by ld. counsel for the petitioner on 19.12.2023 that it is Deba s/o Badal, who is named amongst the culprits and that it is on account of the wrong identity that petitioner was sought to be arrested, as he is Deba @ Sukhdev Singh S/o Sulkhan Singh; and not Deba s/o Badal as mentioned in the FIR.

3.

As per the status report filed on behalf of the respondent-State, the statements of the Nambardar and member Panchayat of the Village were recorded and perusal thereof revealed that actual and correct name of the accused Deba s/o Badal (as named in the FIR) is Sukhdev Masih @ Deba s/o Sulkhan Masih @ Badal, who is the petitioner VIVEK PAHWA 2024.02.22 18:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-63878-2023 2024:PHHC: 024467 seeking bail.

4.

After going through the aforesaid status report, ld. counsel for the petitioner conceded that petitioner is known by the alias name of Sukhdev Masih @ Deba s/o Sulakhan Masih @ Badal. 5.

It is thus clear that initially petitioner tried to mislead this Court by pleading wrong facts about his identity. 6.

Having regard to the aforesaid conduct of the petitioner and also the specific allegations made against the petitioner in the FIR, he is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.

Dismissed.

21.02.2024
 (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE

1. Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes

2. Whether reportable?

Yes VIVEK PAHWA 2024.02.22 18:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document