Jabarjung Singh v. State Of Punjab

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 15.02.2025 Jabarjung Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Sahil Nain, Advocate and Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Jabarjung Singh 07.11.2024 318(4), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of BNS, 2023 Dera Bassi SAS Nagar 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the bail petition filed by the co-accused Sukhwinder Singh i.e. CRM-M-62650-2024, a fact has been recorded that another Sukhwinder Singh s/o late Mahinder Singh, was the main accused in the FIR, and thereafter, vide order dated 13.01.2025, passed in CRM-M-62650-2024, concession of anticipatory bail

- 2 - has been granted.

In support of his submissions, learned counsel produces copy of order dated 13.01.2025, passed in CRM-M-62650-2024, titled as, "Sukhwinder Singh v. State of Punjab", in Court today. Same is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place.

3.

Learned counsel further submits that the role of the present petitioner is also similar, as the only allegation against him is his mere presence with the co-accused, and nothing else has been attributed to him. Furthermore, it is not the case of the prosecution that petitioner signed any document to extend any benefit to Sukhwinder Singh, son of Mahinder Singh.

4.

Learned counsel, thus, claiming parity with the co-accused, submits that petitioner also deserves same concession. Moreover, petitioner expresses his inclination to join investigation as and when required by the Investigating Agency.

5.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made in the present petition. However, he does dispute the submissions addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner. 6.

I have considered the submissions and gone through the record available before the Court.

7.

Considering the submissions addressed and the facts recorded here-above, this Courts deems it proper to extend the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Thus, petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the

- 3 - event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

8.

Besides, petitioner would submit/surrender his passport before the Arresting Officer and an undertaking on oath that in case of leaving the Country, he would seek prior permission from the Investigating Agency/concerned Court.

9.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE February 15, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No