Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-60451-2024 202 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1 CRM-M-60451-2024 Decided on: 31.01.2025 Baljit Singh @ Malkiat Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:
Legal Reasoning
evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre- trial incarceration. 7. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this ANJU RANI 2025.02.05 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 2 CRM-M-60451-2024 stage. 3 8. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. 9. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 10. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 11. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Investigator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. 12. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court. 13. In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections mentioned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding ANJU RANI 2025.02.05 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 3 CRM-M-60451-2024 the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, in that case, the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 4 14. It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State and/or the victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court is empowered to do so. 15. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. 16. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 17. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 18. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any,
Arguments
Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab. Ms. Abhilasha Kainth, Advocate for the complainant. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 68 07.07.2024 Sadar Patti, District 109, 333, 324(4), 191(3), 190 Tarn Taran of BNS 2023 and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act 1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail. 2. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: “3. That the true facts pertaining to the present case are that the complainant namely Shehbaj Singh got recorded his statement before the investigating officer to the effect that on 06.07.2024, at about 4:30 P.M., he along with his father was present at home and his sister namely Sharanjit Kaur was also on a visit to his home. They were casually chitchatting when his uncle (chacha) Hazara Singh armed with sword, Simarjit Singh wielding a dater (sickle), Baljit Singh armed with 12 bore rifle, Gian Singh armed with dang (bamboo staff), Nishan Singh armed with dang, Harjinder Kaur (chachi) aunt of complainant, Ninder Kaur and two other companions unknown to the complainant barged into the house ANJU RANI 2025.02.05 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 1 CRM-M-60451-2024 2 of the complainant. Simarjit Singh raised a lalkara (rallying cry) upon which Baljit Singh fired a gunshot from his 12 bore rifle which hit the left thigh of the complainant and the remaining assailants also started beating the complainant. He slumped on the ground when Sharanjit Kaur intervened, Hazara Singh hurled a brick bat upon her which hit her nose. Baljit Singh fired 3-4 more gunshots which hit the tractor and parts of the house of the complainant as well as the electricity meter installed outside the home. When the family members raised an alarm, the assailants fled away from the spot and in this regard, the present case FIR No.68 dated 07.07.2024, under section 109/333/324(4)/191(3)/190 of BNS & 25/27 of the Arms Act has been registered at police station Sadar Patti, District Tarn Taran against the petitioner namely Baljit Singh alias Malkit Singh as well as co-accused namely Hazara Singh, Simarjit Singh alias Sona, Gian Singh, Nishan Singh, Harjinder Kaur and Ninder Kaur and 3 unknown persons.” 3. Petitioner’s counsel prays for bail on the ground that matter has been compromised. He further prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. 4. Counsel appearing for the complainant submits that she would have no objection if the present petition is allowed. However counsel for the State opposes the bail. 5. Given the nature of allegations coupled with the fact that parties have compromised the matter, this Court would not deny bail, however, it is clarified that this bail order shall neither be considered as a reason to quash the FIR nor shall come as hinderance in the way of the prosecution or the Court in case, there is violation of Sections 216/217 of BNS 2023(181/182 IPC earlier). 6. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The
Decision
stand disposed of. 31.01.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No. Whether reportable: (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE ANJU RANI 2025.02.05 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 4