High CourtsSingle Bench

Jasbir Singh vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 23 September 2019 · Citation: (2019) 09 P&H CK 0209

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 148, 149, 201, 436, 379, 427, 506 · Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 39553 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 680 words

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J

This petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 16 dated 08.02.2018, registered under Sections 436, 379, 427, 506, 148, 149 and 201 (added later on) of the IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at Police Station Ajnala, District Amritsar (Rural).

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon order dated 06.05.2019 passed in CRM-M-19431-2019, whereby co-accused Balwinder Singh has already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court. The operative part of the order reads as under:

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits as per the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner had entered into an agreement to sell with the complainant, his brother and sons for `21,18,000/- and the petitioner had given `2,00,000/- to them on the basis of the agreement for which the possession of the land was transferred. It is further stated in the FIR that the land in dispute is in fact in the ownership of the Punjab Government and the petitioner has acquired possession and the complainant intended to transfer the possessory rights in favour of the petitioner. It is further stated in the FIR that on 08.02.2018, the petitioner along with many other persons came to the Dera of the complainant and with the purpose of taking the possession, has caused damage to their property, however, no injury was caused to any person.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in fact there was an agreement to sell dated 29.11.2017 which was executed by the complainant's side in favour of the petitioner on receiving an amount of `14,25,000/- and this is the only agreement to sell between the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in this agreement, the details of the amount as well as the ownership of the Punjab Government is mentioned and the complainant, vide earlier agreement dated 18.09.2010, has obtained possessory rights from one Balkar Singh and has transferred the same to petitioner's side.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner is in judicial custody since 19.03.2019 and he is not involved in any other case and it is a totally civil dispute based on an agreement to sell.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Sukhwinder Singh and on the basis of the custody certificate filed today in Court, could not dispute the factual position, however, submitted that during investigation, the police has added Section 201 IPC.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case, considering the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also in view of the fact that petitioner is no more required for any custodial investigation, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail in aforesaid FIR including newly added Section 201 IPC, on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned."

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that another co-accused Baj Singh @ Balraj Singh has also been granted concession of regular bail, vide order dated 26.06.2019 passed by this Court in CRM-M-26279-2019.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Narpinder Singh and on the basis of the custody certificate filed today in Court, has not disputed the factual position and submitted that now the challan stands presented and charges have been framed. As per custody certificate, the petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.07.2019.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case, considering the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.07.2019; two of the co-accused have already been granted concession of regular bail as noticed above and also in view of the fact that conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.