Bhupinderdeep Singh alias Bhinda and another vs State of Punjab

Hon''ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal 1. The prayer in the present petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioners.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not named in the FIR. There are certain persons specifically named in the FIR, who caused injuries to the complainant. The petitioners have been roped in on the basis of statement of co-accused in custody and also on the basis of some extra judicial confession. It was stated in the FIR that there were 9-10 other persons along with accused who were present at the place of occurrence. Petitioner No. 1 is in custody since 29th June, 2011 and Petitioner No. 2 is in custody since 28th June, 2011.

Learned Counsel for the State submitted that though no injury has been attributed to petitioner No. 1, however, he was driving the car in which he had taken away the accused from the place of occurrence. Petitioner No. 2 has been alleged carrying an iron rod, however, there is no injury attributed to him. He further submitted that petitioner No. 1 was named by Balbir Singh claiming that he has made extra juidcial confession before him, whereas, petitioner No. 2 is named by Harvinder Singh, an accused named in the FIR. He further submitted that the petitioners were members of the unlawful assembly.

After hearing Learned Counsels for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioners are not named in the FIR and no injury has been attributed to them even in the supplementary statement of the complainant, I am of the opinion that they derserve concession of bail, pending trial. Accordingly, they are directed to be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, District Moga.

The petition stands disposed of.