Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Sr.No.221
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018
Reserved on:24.08.2018
Date of Pronouncement:28.08.2018
Dilpreet Bedi ….petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab …..respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr.Navkiran Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner
Mr.Sidakmeet Sandhu, AAG Punjab
Mr.Veneet Sharma, Advocate
for the complainant
***
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. :
CRM No.29373 of 2018
Application is allowed as prayed for. Annexure A1 is
taken on record.
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018
Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail in FIR
No. 216 dated 25.07.2017 under Sections 307/ 324/ 326/ 427/ 506/
148/149 IPC, registered at Police Station Division ‘E’, District Amritsar
City (Annexure P1).
1 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 2
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the
allegation in the FIR, got registered by Rashmi Bedi, wife of co-
accused Sandeep Bedi (who is the real brother of the present
petitioner), she was married with Sandeep Bedi and out of this marriage
two sons were born. It is further stated in FIR that since her husband
used to maltreat her, she returned back to her parental home, but she
was taken back by Sandeep Bedi. In the year 2014, Sandeep Bedi
prepared certain fake documents for the purpose of obtaining loan and
on that account FIR No.93/14 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,
120-B IPC was registered against him at Police Station Civil Lines,
Amritsar, but he did not mend his ways. Thereafter, Sandeep Bedi
again committed fraud with the complainant, who got FIR No.91 dated
30.05.2016, registered against him under Section 406 IPC, at Police
Station Sadar and since then he is threatening her and pressurizing her
to withdraw the cases. It is further stated in the FIR that on 23.07.2017,
at about 10.15 PM, she was present in her house, when she heard a
noise of breaking of the glass. When she came on the road, she saw
that her husband Sandeep and his brother i.e.the petitioner Dilpreet
along with three other unknown persons were damaging her car with
bricks. When she tried to stop them, Sandeep Bedi who was carrying a
‘datar’ in his hand attacked on her head which hit on the left front side
of her head and blood started oozing out. Thereafter, Sandeep Bedi
caught hold of her from hair and threw her on the ground and started
beating her. On which she raised noise and hearing her cries, her
2 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 3
mother came to her rescue and many people gathered there. On seeing
them, the accused ran away with their respective weapons.
Counsel for the petitioner has argued that as per the
opinion of the doctor, when the complainant had come to the
emergency, she was conscious and well oriented. Injury No.1 was
incised wound of 4.3 x 1 cm on left side of her forehead. Counsel for
the petitioner further submits that though on 29.07.2017, the
Department of Forensic Medicine Toxicology, Govt.Medical
College, Amritsar, had given an opinion that injury No.1 is grievous in
nature, however, based on CT-Scan report, the Board of Doctors
constituted by Civil Surgeon, Amritsar, on the request of complainant
Rashmi Bedi, found injury No.1 of the above said patient, grievous in
nature.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on
12.08.2017, the Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, had
given another opinion to the SHO, Police Station ‘E’ Division,
Amritsar, regarding the MLR of complainant Rashmi Bedi that the
possibility of injury No.1 being caused by friendly hand cannot be
ruled out and therefore, in view of the conflicting opinions, it cannot be
said, at this stage, that injury sustained by complainant was grievous in
nature.
Counsel for the petitioner has further argued that there is
no direct allegation against the petitioner except that he is the brother
3 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 4
of the estranged husband of the complainant namely Sandeep Bedi with
whom the complainant is having litigation. Counsel for the petitioner
has further submitted that initially the offence under Section 307 IPC
was deleted but again on the basis of medical report Section 307 IPC
has been added and therefore, the role of the police is suspicious as on
account of the matrimonial dispute pending between the complainant
Rashmi Bedi and her husband Sandeep Bedi, the police is trying to help
the complainant. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
investigation is complete and the petitioner is no more required in
further investigation. The petitioner is in custody since 23.07.2017 and
he is not involved in any other case except a jail offence.
In reply, learned State counsel has submitted that the
allegations against the petitioner are that he along with his brother
Sandeep Bedi have intentionally caused injuries to the complainant and
the petitioner has taken active part in the occurrence. Learned State
counsel has submitted that the police has initially registered the FIR
under Section 307 IPC based on the medical opinion and thereafter, it
was deleted. However, on receiving the opinion of Board of Doctors,
Section 307 IPC is again added and the police is conducting a fair and
impartial investigation.
Learned State counsel, on instructions from the
investigating officer has also informed that the petitioner is not
involved in any other case except in a case/jail offence for using a
4 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 5
mobile phone in jail.
Learned counsel appearing for the complainant has
strongly opposed the prayer for regular bail on the ground that the
complainant Rashmi Bedi has filed CRM-M No.28997 of 2017,
praying for issuance of a direction to the respondents to investigate the
FIR No.91 dated 30.05.2015 under Section 406 IPC, registered at
Police Station Sadar, Amritsar, as well as the present FIR,
expeditiously, and in a time bound manner. Learned counsel for the
complainant has further submitted that in the said petition, vide order
dated 09.11.2017, the Commissioner of Police, Amritsar, was directed
to ensure that the life and liberty of Rashmi Bedi is fully protected and
she is not harassed either at the instance of Sandeep Bedi or the police
officials. It is further stated that the said petition is now pending for
24.09.2018.
Learned counsel for the complainant has further
submitted that one Gursajan Bedi has also filed a petition bearing
CRM-M No.33232 of 2018, praying for protection of his life and
liberty as well as of his family members and to take appropriate action
on a representation dated 20.04.2018 given to the police. It is stated
that Gursajan Bedi is receiving ransom calls from one Harry Chadha
and one FIR No.165 of 2016, under Sections 387,506 IPC was
registered in Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar. Counsel for the
complainant further submits that in the said petition, it is also stated
5 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 6
that said Harry Chadha is having a conspiracy with Sandeep Bedi,
husband of the complainant. Counsel for the complainant further
submits that in this petition also vide order dated 17.08.2018,
Commissioner of Police, Amritsar, is directed to look into the
grievance of Gursajan Bedi to protect his life and liberty and this
petition is also listed for 24.09.2018.
It is submitted on behalf of the complainant that in case
the petitioner is released on bail, he will create a threat to the life and
liberty of the complainant as the complainant is receiving threatening
calls from her estranged husband i.e.the co-accused Sandeep Bedi.
Counsel for the complainant has also submitted that the said Harry
Chadha is a wanted criminal and the police has also issued
proclamation in this regard.
In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that in the petition filed by complainant Rashmi Bedi i.e. CRM-M
No.28997 of 2017, there are no allegations against the present
petitioner and all the allegations are against Sandeep Bedi. It is also
submitted that the petition filed by Gursajan Bedi i.e. CRM-M
No.33232 of 2018, is also filed by the same counsel and therefore, both
the complainant and Gursajan Bedi are hand in glove with each other as
Gursajan Bedi is a relative of the petitioner with whom there was some
business dispute with the co-accused Sandeep Bedi and the said
petition filed by Gursajan Bedi is based on false averments just to settle
6 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 7
his personal score with Sandeep Bedi and there is no threat to his life
and liberty.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find that
the matrimonial dispute between the complainant and co-accused
Sandeep Bedi, who is the real brother of the present petitioner, has
gone to an extreme extent. The case files of the aforesaid two petitions
filed by Rashmi Bedi and Gursajan Bedi, were summoned, as the
counsel for the complainant has heavily relied upon the averments
made therein. A perusal of CRM-M No.28997 of 2017 filed by Rashmi
Bedi shows that the allegations levelled by Rashmi Bedi are against her
husband Sandeep Bedi and the name of petitioner is not specifically
mentioned. Moreover, the prayer in the said petition is for expeditious
investigation of the case and FIR No.91 dated 30.05.2015, in which
only Sandeep Bedi is accused as well of the present FIR No.216 dated
25.07.2017 under Sections 307/ 324/ 326/ 427/ 506/ 148/149 IPC,
registered at Police Station Division ‘E’, District Amritsar City, in
which report the police has already submitted the report under Section
173 Cr.P.C as petitioner and Sandeep Bedi are arrested.
A perusal of the second petition i.e. CRM-M No.33232
of 2018 filed by Gursajan Bedi also show that he is levelling
allegations against one Harry Chadha, claiming him to be an
accomplice of Sandeep Bedi and again there are no direction
allegations against the present petitioner. Needless to say that in both
7 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 8
these petitions, the present petitioner is not even arrayed as one of the
respondents.
Considering the fact that the challan against the
petitioner has already been presented and petitioner is no more required
for any further investigation and he is in custody for more than four
months and there are no direct allegations of causing injury to
complainant, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail, subject to
furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court on the
following conditions:
(i)The petitioner shall report to the SHO/Investigating
Officer once in every week.
(ii) The petitioner shall not visit the place of residence
or place of work of complainant Rashmi Bedi and in
case he is found extending any threat to her, it will
be open for the investigating officer to apply for
cancellation of bail.
(iii)The petitioner shall also furnish surety bond for
` One lakh of his close relative/mother, to the effect
that he/she will keep a watch on the activities of the
petitioner and shall be responsible if he is found
involved in misusing the concession of bail.
(iv)The Commissioner of Police, Amritsar, will ensure
the protection of life and liberty of the complainant
as already directed.
8 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
Criminal Misc.M-No.28435 of 2018 9
The petition stands disposed of. The observations made
in this petition with regard to the facts of CRM-M No.28997 of 2017
and CRM-M No.33232 of 2018 are only for the purpose of deciding
this bail application and will have no bearing on the merits of the said
cases.
(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN)
JUDGE
28.08.2018
neenu
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No.
Whether reportable- Yes/No
9 of 9
04-09-2018 09:31:21 :::
