Pardeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

Present:

Mr. Ankur Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG Punjab.

1.

For the commission of offence punishable under Sections 132, 191(3) and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the FIR No.201 dated 25.12.2024 has been lodged in Police Station Mallanwala, District Ferozepur. In the abovementioned case, the petitioner is apprehending arrest, and therefore, for the benefit of anticipatory bail he has approached this Court by virtue of present petition under Section 482 of BNSS. 2.

In nut-shell, the facts emerging from record are that the allegation against the petitioner are that on 25.12.2024 when a police party visited the home of the petitioner, to arrest him with regard to a case pertaining to FIR No.249/2023 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 325, 307, 427 IPC Police Station Sadar Sirsa, the petitioner fled from the spot but he was

chased by the police official namely ASI Satya Narayan and when enquiries were being made from him, the petitioner along with several other persons manhandled the police officials, interrupted them in the discharge of their official duty and with the help of other villagers got himself freed and escaped from the spot.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that the abovementioned incident was reported by the Sub-Inspector Radhe Shyam and pursuant thereto the FIR for the commission of abovementioned offence has been lodged and investigation taken up.

4.

Heard.

5.

It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that the offence is triable by Court of Judicial Magistrate, and that except one case the petitioner has no other case pending against him. It has also been contended that nothing is left to be recovered from the possession of petitioner, and therefore, he is entitled for the benefit of anticipatory bail. 6.

The learned State Counsel has filed a status report. He has controverted the abovementioned arguments by submitting that the petitioner does not have clean antecedents as he had been prosecuted for five different cases in the past and even today one criminal case is pending against him. It has also been contended that the offence committed by the petitioner is of grievous nature as the petitioner had interrupted the police officials from discharging their official duty and even assaulted them with the help of his co-villagers.

7.

The record has been perused carefully.

8.

A perusal of the record shows that there are several factors which are required to be taken into consideration at this stage. Those factors are:- i. that the offence is triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate;

ii. that the maximum punishment prescribed for the commission of abovementioned offence is imprisonment up to two years;

iii. that nothing is left to be recovered from the possession of petitioner;

iv. that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not likely to produce a fruitful result;

v. that there is nothing on record to show that while on anticipatory bail, the petitioner is likely to tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses; and vi. that there is nothing on record to show that while on anticipatory bail, the petitioner will not participate/cooperate in the investigation.

09.

Taking into consideration the cumulative effect of all the abovementioned factors, it is hereby held that the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail.

10.

In view of the abovementioned discussion, it is hereby held that the present petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the same is hereby allowed, and the petitioner is accorded the benefit of anticipatory bail. It is hereby directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer. The

petitioner will join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Vinod Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No