CRM No.M-33330 of 2017
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M- 33330 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: November 2 , 2017.
Gurmeet Singh …… PETITIONER (s)
Versus
State of Punjab …… RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. Sandeep Chopra, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Rahul Rathore, DAG, Punjab
*****
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?
*****
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner in FIR No.144 dated 10.07.2017 under Sections 354/323/148/149/506
IPC registered at Police Station Urban Estate, Patiala, District Patiala.
Contentions on behalf of the petitioner noticed by this Court on
08.09.2017 while issuing notice of motion read as under:-
“It is submitted that a scuffle took place between the parties
on 09.07.2017 on account of an altercation regarding certain
articles which had been kept by Charanjit Kaur at the residence of
the complainant’s sister. Allegations have been falsely raised in the1 of 3
06-11-2017 23:57:37 :::
CRM No.M-33330 of 2017
-2-FIR merely for the addition of the offence punishable under
Section 354 IPC.”
Petitioner stated to be young boy aged nineteen years, is submitted
to be falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that no action has
been taken by the police authorities against the complainant and others in respect
to the injuries received by the petitioner’s mother, sister and wife. Reference is
made to Annexures P2 to P4. It is submitted that the petitioner has joined
investigation and he undertakes to face the proceedings and not misuse the
concession of anticipatory bail, if afforded to him. Therefore, it is prayed that
this petition be allowed.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from HC Kuldeep
Singh, verifies that the petitioner has joined investigation. It is submitted that
the medico legal reports (Annexures P2 to P4) indicate that the medical
examination was conducted at 5.50 p.m. whereas, the occurrence in question is
alleged to have taken place in the afternoon of 09.07.2017, thus no action has
been taken thereon. However, it is not denied that FIR in question was
registered at 5.45 p.m. It is verified by learned counsel for the State that the
petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case. No recovery is to be
effected from him. Two of the five accused have been granted the concession of
bail pending trial and another two have been afforded the concession of
anticipatory bail.
There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioner is
likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true
facts in the Court, if released on bail.
2 of 3
06-11-2017 23:57:38 :::
CRM No.M-33330 of 2017
-3-
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above but without
commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this
petition is allowed. Consequently, order dated 08.09.2017 is made absolute.
It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall
be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely
confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition.
( LISA GILL )
November 2 , 2017. JUDGE
‘om’
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
06-11-2017 23:57:38 :::