Daljit Singh alias Sethi vs State of Punjab

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Petitioner-Daljit Singh alias Sethi son of Narinder Singh, has directed the instant petition for the grant of regular bail in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused, namely, Bhupinder Singh, Baldev Singh and Jaspal Singh @ Pali etc., vide FIR No. 91 dated 28.06.2012, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 325, 323, 506, 201, 148, 149 IPC and Section 30 of The Arms Act, by the police of Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur.

Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition for regular bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

What cannot possibly be disputed here is that, during the course of investigation, the petitioner was found innocent and was exonerated by the police in this case. Subsequently, he was summoned in the wake of application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the prosecution as an additional accused, to face trial of the indicated offences by the trial Court, by way of summoning order dated 01.08.2013 (Annexure P-10). Neither any specific role nor any particular injury is attributed to him in the FIR. In that eventuality, whether the provisions of vicarious liability under Sections 148 and 149 IPC are attracted to the facts of the present case against the petitioner or not, inter alia, would be a moot point to be decided during the course of trial by the trial Court.

Be that as it may, it is not a matter of dispute that Baldev Singh, similarly situated co-accused of the petitioner, was granted the concession of regular bail by this Court, by virtue of order dated 05.11.2012, rendered in CRM No. M-32844 of 2012, whereas Jaspal Singh @ Pali, co-accused, to whom injuries were attributed, having been caused to complainant-Hakikat Singh, was also allowed bail by this Court, by means of order dated 20.03.2013, rendered in CRM No. M-1173 of 2013(Annexure P-13)(colly.). Therefore, I see no reason not to extend the same benefit of regular bail to the present petitioner as well under the similar set of circumstances.

Moreover, the petitioner has himself surrendered in the court on 13.03.2014. Since then he is in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain him in jail. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. Since, even the trial Court has ordered de novo trial, so, the conclusion of the main case will naturally take a long time.

In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial, the instant petition for regular bail is hereby accepted. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits in the trial of the case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for regular bail.