Harwinder Singh vs State of Punjab

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—As is evident from the record that petition filed on behalf of petitioner No. 1-Harwinder Singh son of Kulwant Singh was dismissed as withdrawn as having infructuous on account of his arrest by the police, by virtue of separate order dated 02.07.2014, by this Court.

Petitioner No. 2-Balraj Singh son of Paramjit Singh, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of concession of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused, vide FIR No. 66 dated 02.05.2014, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 452, 436, 427, 336, 506, 120B, 148 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act (offence punishable under Sections 326, 323, 324 & 435 were later on added), by the police of Police Station Jhabal, District Tarn Taran.

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 deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail as it relates to petitioner No. 2 deserves to be accepted in this context.

During the course of preliminary hearing, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1 lacs, by way of order dated 04.06.2014. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner was stated to have already deposited the amount, vide bank draft No. 224096 dated 04.06.2014 with the Registry of this Court.

Sequelly, the following order was passed by this Court on July 02, 2014:-

The learned counsel has contended that neither any specific role or particular part is attributed to Balraj Singh (petitioner No. 2) in the FIR. He was stated to be an associate of other main accused.

Adjourned to 16.7.2014 for arguments.

Meanwhile, petitioner No. 2 is directed to join the investigation before the next date of hearing. In the event of his arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit him to bail on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- to his satisfaction.

At the very outset, on instructions from ASI Satpal, learned State counsel has acknowledged the relevant factual matrix and submitted that the petitioner No. 2 has already joined the investigation. He is no longer required for further interrogation, at this stage. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. Moreover, all the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the prosecution has not yet submitted the final police report (challan) against the accused, so, the final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.

In the light of aforesaid reasons and 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 of main case, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim bail already granted to the petitioner No. 2, by virtue of indicated order by this Court, is hereby made absolute, subject to the compliance of the conditions, as contemplated u/s 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Needless to mention that, nothing observed here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits of the case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for pre-arrest bail. However, petitioner No. 2 is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the investigating agency, failing which, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of his bail, in this Court.

At the same time, the Registry is directed to send the indicated amount of Rs. 1 lacs to the trial Court for its provisional disbursement to the complainant, on his furnishing adequate security, due identification and verification against a valid receipt subject to the final decision of the present case.