Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M-11052 of 2014 Date of Decision : April 07, 2014 Sapinder Singh .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN Present : Mr.S.S.Rangi, Advocate Dr.
Deipa Singh, Addl.
A.G., Punjab T.P.S.MANN, J.
(Oral) Prayer made in the petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial of the case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 18.4.2012.
As per the FIR, the petitioner had given a brick blow on the head of complainant- Jagjit Singh.
Similarly, Harpreet Singh, co-accused of the petitioner had given a danda blow on the shoulder of the complainant.
Thereafter, the petitioner and his co-accused were said to have caused injuries to Tejinder Singh, since deceased.
It is also submitted that the case is of version and cross-version.
The petitioner also received injuries on his person for which he was medico-legally examined during which three injuries were noticed on his person.
One of them was incised in nature and present at the anterio-medial aspect of his left thigh.
It is further submitted that Harpreet Singh, co-accused of the petitioner, who was similarly situated as the petitioner, has since been granted CRM M-11052 of 2014 -2- the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 10.1.2014 in CRM M-42662 of 2013.
The trial of the case is likely to take a long time.
Therefore, the petitioner may be released on bail.
Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner by submitting that the petitioner and his co-accused had caused indiscriminate injuries to Tejinder Singh, who later on died as a result thereof.
She, however, could not dispute the fact that Harpreet Singh, Co.accused of the petitioner, who was specifically attributed causing of a danda blow on the shoulder of complainant Jagjit Singh PW, having been granted the concession of bail by this Court.
Without commenting on the merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either party, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner deserves the concession of bail.
Resultantly, the petition is accepted.
Bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala.
( T.P.S.MANN ) April 07, 2014 JUDGE ajay-1 Kumar-I Ajay 2014.04.09 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh