Amandeep Singh vs State of Punjab

S.S. Saron, J.—Heard counsel for the Petitioner.

The Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him on 01.03.2011 for the offences u/s 395 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Rama Mandi, Jalandhar.

The FIR, in the case, has been registered on the statement of Kundan Singh who has retired as Subedar Major from Army. Kundan Singh (complainant) has two sons namely Sukhdev Singh who is elder and Dalbir Singh who is the younger son. Dalbir Singh who is the younger son of the complainant is studying in Australia. The marriage of the elder son of the complainant-namely Sukhdev Singh was to be solemnized on 15.02.2011. On account of the marriage both the sons of the complainant were to come to Jalandhar. Dalbir Singh was to fly back on 28.02.2011 and due to this reason, he had to go to Delhi for the purposes of passport etc. and he had left for Delhi at about 12.00 in the afternoon. On 28.02.2011, about 10.30 p.m., Kundan Singh (complainant) and all his family members were sleeping in their house that someone knocked on his door from outside. Kundan Singh (complainant) went outside near the door. Then, one of the boys standing outside stated that they were friends of Dalbir Singh and were to meet him. The complainant-Kundan Singh replied that he had gone to Delhi for going abroad. The persons standing outside stated that Dalbir Singh had given some currency to them for exchange and they had come to see him in that regard. On this the complainant-Kundan Singh opened the door. There were 7-8 boys who were armed with datars etc. and they entered the house of the complainant. One of the boys placed the datar on the head of Kundan Singh (complainant) and brought him inside. Inside the house, in one of the rooms Sukhdev Singh (the elder son of the complainant) along with daughter-in-law were sleeping. On hearing the noise, Sukhdev Singh (son of the complainant) came outside and one of the assailants attacked him with a datar. The blow of which, hit him on his head. However, as Sukhdev Singh was wearing a turban, the datar blow slipped and hit him on his left shoulder. Then again another boy attacked with a datar hitting the right shoulder of Sukhdev Singh (elder son of the complainant). Among the boys who had come was one Amandeep Singh (Petitioner), resident of Gurdaspur who resides with Paramjit Kaur an aunt (Bhua) of the complainant and he made an attack with his datar. The blow of which hit Sukhdev Singh (elder son of the complainant) on his left side. The wife of the complainant came forward to save him but she too was attacked with datar which blow hit her on her right hand. These boys took away two Nokia mobile phones one white in colour and the other greenish black in colour, which were lying on the bed; besides, they took away one gold ring and some cash and ran away from the site. Due to the injuries caused to the complainant side, they sought first-aid from the Civil Hospital, Jalandhar and got their MLRs prepared. The reason behind this occurrence was that Amandeep Singh (Petitioner) and the younger son of the complainant namely Dalbir Singh were doing the job of security guard together. For some reason, they had an altercation due to which Amandeep Singh used to threaten him (Dalbir Singh). For the said reason, Amandeep Singh and the other boys with a common intention made an attack on complainant''s home and looted them. By taking the MLRs the complainant side was going to the police station that the police met them and their statements were recorded.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the injury attributed to the Petitioner-Amandeep Singh on the person of Sukhdev Singh has been observed in the medical reports to have been caused with a blunt weapon, whereas the Petitioner was carrying a datar which is a sharp-edged weapon. Even otherwise, it is submitted that the said injury is simple in nature. Besides, on the date of the incident, Amandeep Singh (Petitioner) was in Gurdaspur and his OPD Slip (Annexure P-2) has been placed on record. It is also submitted that the allegations in the petition at the most make out an offence u/s 323 IPC.

After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the allegations in the FIR are that the Petitioner along with others had entered the house of Kundan Singh (complainant) at about 10.30 p.m. on 28.02.2011 and had looted the articles of the complainant; besides, had caused injuries to Sukhdev Singh (the elder son of the complainant). Sukhdev Singh admittedly had received injuries. The possibility of the injuries being caused to Sukhdev Singh with a blunt weapon as a result of datar being used from the blunt side cannot be ruled out. This aspect, however, is not to be gone into at this stage. It may be noticed that the injuries were caused by all the assailants on the person of Kundan Singh (complainant), his son Sukhdev Singh and also his wife. On the basis of the statements and the allegations, a prima facie a case for the offence u/s 395 IPC was found to be made out. The Petitioner along with others had gone to the house of the complainant. The OPD Slip (Annexure P-2) referred to by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is of 26.02.2011 i.e. two days before the occurrence. The Petitioner is said to be suffering from enteric fever and he was examined by the Medical Officer Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur. The plea of alibi that has been set up is to be considered by the Investigating Authorities or by the Court as the case may be and the same is not liable to be gone into at this stage while considering the application for grant of pre-arrest bail.

The Petitioner is the person who has been specifically identified in the incident and his name finds mention in the FIR and he is said to have made an attack with his datar on the son of the complainant on his left shoulder. The injuries on the person of Sukhdev Singh (elder son of the complainant) though may be simple and with blunt weapon but the same nevertheless are there besides, there were 5-6 persons who have committed the assault and, therefore, the offence u/s 395 IPC has been found to be made out.

In the facts and circumstances, no ground for pre-arrest bail is made out. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly dismissed.

However, nothing stated or observed herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the investigating authorities and learned trial Court, as the case may be, shall consider the evidence and material as adduced before it uninfluenced by any observations made hereinabove.