Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-3881-2014 Date of Decision: 11.02.2014 Resham Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA Present : Mr.Ramdeep Partap Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Jasdev Singh Brar, AAG., Punjab.
***** SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) Heard.
FIR in this case pertains to the incident that took place in Faridkot Jail.
As per the prosecution, on 19.4.2013 one under-trial fell ill and he was being taken to the hospital, when the petitioner along with several other inmates named in the FIR blocked the movement of the under-trial Harsha Singh.
They attacked the jail officials including the Jail Superintendent and indulged in rioting.
It has been submitted by the learned State counsel that the petitioner was arrested on 1.6.2013.
After investigation, challan has been presented in Court and the case is now fixed for framing of charge.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that no injury attracting the provision of offence punishable under Section 307 IPC, was caused in the incident.
The other co-accused, namely, Sardul Singh, had also applied for regular bail vide CRM-M-35293- Satyawan 2014.02.17 09:32 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-3881-2014 2 2013.
His petition was allowed vide order dated 25.11.2013 by the Coordinate Bench of this Court.
The case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from the case of Sardul Singh.
Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances and further that the petitioner is already in custody of the police and is undergoing sentence, there are no chances of his escaping trial or pressurizing the prosecution witnesses, who are none-else than the jail/police officers/officials.
As the benefit of bail in this case has already been allowed to Sardul Singh, the petitioner is also ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of the CJM/Duty Magistrate, Faridkot, subject to the following conditions :- (i) He shall comply with the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.(ii) In the event of his absence on any date of hearing, the benefit of bail allowed to the him shall stand withdrawn.
The trial Court shall be competent to cancel his bail bond and surety bond and proceed to procure his presence in accordance with law.
In that eventuality the petitioner shall have to seek bail afresh.
(iii) He shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.
(SURINDER GUPTA) 11.02.2014 JUDGE Satyawan Satyawan 2014.02.17 09:32 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" High Court Chandigarh