Sanjay @ Sanju @ Gohli vs State Of Punjab

Manjari Nehru Kaul, J

The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 143, dated 28.07.2020, under

Sections 341, 323, 324, 34 IPC (section 326 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur,District Ferozepur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the case in hand on the basis of an alleged disclosure

statement made by the co-accused Bhopi @ Harmesh, who has since been extended the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated

10.12.2020 (Annexure P-1). It is further submitted by learned counsel that even as per the alleged disclosure statement suffered by the co-accused,

the petitioner was accompanying him at the time of the alleged occurrence and the injury attributed to the petitioner is on the left shoulder of the

complainant, which injury was opined to be simple in nature.

Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from ASI

Gurmeet Singh, has not been able to controvert the factual aspect and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner qua his role in the

occurrence in question. He has further submitted that the recovery of motorcycle on which the accused were travelling at the time of occurrence in

question has been effected from him. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the charges are likely to be framed in the near future.

Heard.

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 22th

October, 2020, I deem it a fit case for grant of the concession of regular bail to the petitioner, as the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future,

more so, in the prevailing conditions due to the outbreak of COVID-19. The petition as such is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail to the

satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of

opinion on the merits of the case.