The High Court
Case Details
CRM-M No.31423 of 2024 -1- 232 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.31423 of 2024 Date of Decision: 21.05.2025 Maninder Singh @ Mani State of Punjab Versus ..... Petitioner ..... Respondent
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *** Present: Mr. Tanvir Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J. S. Arora, DAG, Punjab. *** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) 1. Present fourth petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.161, dated 01.06.2022, under Sections 302, 307, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 379-B, 201 & 120-B of IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Cantonment, District Amritsar (Annexure P-1). 2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Lakhwinder Singh. It was alleged that on 01.06.2022, he received an information that his son Lovepreet Singh (deceased) and his friend Gursimran Singh had received fire arm injuries and they were admitted in Amandeep Hospital. On receiving the information, the complainant along RITTU 2025.05.21 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.31423 of 2024 -2- with his relatives reached Amandeep Hospital, where he found that his son Lovepreet Singh already died during treatment. On enquiry, he came to know that Gursimran Singh was having friendship with one girl, namely, Simran Bala, due to which a quarrel occurred with Gurjit Singh @ Gurjant, Manjinder Singh (petitioner), Guri, Ravinder Singh and their two unknown associates and on account of the same, the fire arm injuries to his son Lovepreet Singh and his friend Gursimran Singh were inflicted. Request was made to take legal action against the culprits. On the registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. The petitioner was arrested on 03.06.2022. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar praying for grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar finding no merit in the same, dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 25.11.2022. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court thrice praying for the grant of bail by way of filing CRM-M-1352-2023; CRM-M-53694-2023 and CRM-M-10635-2024, however, all the bail petitions filed by the petitioners were allowed to dismissed as not pressed vide orders dated 17.01.2023; 08.01.2024 and 05.04.2024, respectively. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for grant of bail by way of filing the present fourth petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. He has submitted that from the allegations made in the FIR, crux of the whole case as alleged is that Gursimran Singh was having friendship with RITTU 2025.05.21 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.31423 of 2024 -3- one girl Simran Bala. It is submitted that during the investigation, it has been found that deceased Lovepreet Singh was fired upon by Jagjeet Singh @ Jota, wheres, against the petitioner, allegations are to the effect that he exhorted the co-accused to fire at the deceased. It is submitted that the allegations made against the petitioner are false and frivolous on the face of it, even otherwise the petitioner neither was armed with any weapon nor he has played any overt act. It is submitted that the investigation is complete and charges are framed and out of 47 prosecution witnesses, 04 witnesses including the material witnesses i.e. the complainant and eye witness have also been examined. He submits that co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Ravinder Singh @ Raja @ Malhi has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 passed in CRM-M-9664-2025 and thus, case of the petitioner is at par with that of the co-accused, who has been granted bail by this Court. He has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and thus, he deserves to be granted bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner was specifically named in the FIR along with the co-accused being part of the unlawful assembly and thus, was actively involved in the commission of offence. On instructions, he submits that out of total 47 prosecution witnesses, only 04 witnesses have been examined till date. He has further endorsed the fact that co-accused of the petitioner has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025. 5. Heard. RITTU 2025.05.21 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.31423 of 2024 -4- 6. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is inferred that the FIR was lodged by the father of the deceased. The allegations primarily against the petitioner are regarding exhortation of co-accused by him. As reflected from the custody certificate, the petitioner has suffered incarceration of 02 years, 08 months & 10 days as on 19.02.2025 and 02 years, 11 months and 12 days as of today. It further reflects that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Co-accused of the petitioner has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025. 7. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The petitioner is in custody since the date of his arrest, i.e. 03.06.2022 and co-accused, namely, Ravinder Singh @ Raja @ Malhi, whose case is stated to be at par with the petitioner, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025. The petitioner is not involved in any other case. 8. The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides and perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail on the basis of parity as the co-accused, namely, Ravinder Singh @ Raja @ Malhi has already been admitted to bail by this Court as stated above. 9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the RITTU 2025.05.21 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.31423 of 2024 -5- satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 21.05.2025 rittu (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No RITTU 2025.05.21 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document