“learned Counsel Inter-alia Contended That in Fact Petitioner No.1 Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1059762
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnNov-30-2012
Appellant“learned Counsel Inter-alia Contended That in Fact Petitioner No.1
RespondentState of Punjab
Excerpt:
crm not m-36201 of 2012 (o&m) 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm not m-36201 of 2012 (o&m) date of decision:30. 11.2012 jeeta singh & channa singh ...petitioners versus state of punjab ...respondent coram: hon'ble mr.justice mehinder singh sullar present:- mr.naresh jain, advocate for the petitioners. ms.amarjit kaur khurana, addl. ag punjab for the state. mehinder singh sullar, j.(oral) petitioners jeeta singh son of piara singh and channa singh son of bhola ram have directed the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against them along with their other co-accused, vide fir no.129 dated 3.10.2012 (annexure p1), for the commission of offences punishable under sections 148, 186, 332 & 353 read with section 149 ipc by the police of police station gidderbaha, district sri muktsar sahib, invoking the provisions of section 438 cr.pc.2. notice of the petition was issued to the state.3. after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this respect. crm not m-36201 of 2012 (o&m”4. during the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by this court on 19.11.2012:- “learned counsel, inter-alia, contended that in fact petitioner no.1 sustained multiple injuries on his head, abdomen and other parts of the body, on account of negligence of the employees of the punjab state power corporation, sub division, gidderbaha. the argument is that in order to save their skin they have lodged the present false case against the petitioners. heard. notice of motion be issued to the respondent, returnable for 30.11.2012. meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation before the next date of hearing. in the event of their arrest, the arresting officer would admit them to bail on their furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds in the sum of rs.25,000/- each to his satisfaction.”5. at the very outset, the learned state counsel, on instructions from asi balkaran singh, has acknowledged the factual matrix and stated that the petitioners have already joined the investigation and they are no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. there is no history of their previous involvement in any other criminal case. moreover, it is not a matter of dispute that petitioner no.1 sustained multiple injuries on his head, abdomen and other parts of the body, on account of negligence of the employees of the punjab state power corporation, sub division, gidderbaha. since all the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the court of magistrate, so, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.6. in the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of the facts & circumstances, emanating from the record, as described here-in-above, the instant petition is hereby accepted and the crm not m-36201 of 2012 (o&m) 3 interim anticipatory bail already granted to the petitioners, vide order dated 19.11.2012 is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as envisaged under section 438(2) cr.pc.7. needless to mention that in case the petitioners do not cooperate or join the investigation, then the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of their anticipatory bail, in this relevant direction. 30.11.2012 (mehinder singh sullar) as judge
Judgment:

CRM not M-36201 of 2012 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM not M-36201 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision:

30. 11.2012 Jeeta Singh & Channa Singh ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Naresh Jain, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms.Amarjit Kaur Khurana, Addl. AG Punjab for the State. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.(Oral) Petitioners Jeeta Singh son of Piara Singh and Channa Singh son of Bhola Ram have directed the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against them along with their other co-accused, vide FIR No.129 dated 3.10.2012 (Annexure P1), for the commission of offences punishable under sections 148, 186, 332 & 353 read with section 149 IPC by the police of Police Station Gidderbaha, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC.

2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this respect. CRM not M-36201 of 2012 (O&M”

4. During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by this Court on 19.11.2012:- “Learned counsel, inter-alia, contended that in fact petitioner No.1 sustained multiple injuries on his head, abdomen and other parts of the body, on account of negligence of the employees of the Punjab State Power Corporation, Sub Division, Gidderbaha. The argument is that in order to save their skin they have lodged the present false case against the petitioners. Heard. Notice of motion be issued to the respondent, returnable for 30.11.2012. Meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation before the next date of hearing. In the event of their arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit them to bail on their furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to his satisfaction.”

5. At the very outset, the learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Balkaran Singh, has acknowledged the factual matrix and stated that the petitioners have already joined the investigation and they are no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. There is no history of their previous involvement in any other criminal case. Moreover, it is not a matter of dispute that petitioner No.1 sustained multiple injuries on his head, abdomen and other parts of the body, on account of negligence of the employees of the Punjab State Power Corporation, Sub Division, Gidderbaha. Since all the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate, so, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.

6. In the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of the facts & circumstances, emanating from the record, as described here-in-above, the instant petition is hereby accepted and the CRM not M-36201 of 2012 (O&M) 3 interim anticipatory bail already granted to the petitioners, vide order dated 19.11.2012 is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as envisaged under section 438(2) Cr.PC.

7. Needless to mention that in case the petitioners do not cooperate or join the investigation, then the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of their anticipatory bail, in this relevant direction. 30.11.2012 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge