Swaranjit Singh and Another vs State of Punjab

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Petitioners Swaranjit Singh son of Bahal Singh and Mal Singh son of Mehar Singh have preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against them along with their other co-accused, vide FIR No. 82 dated 11.9.2012, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 148, 323, 380, 447, 452, 454, 511 and 120B read with section 149 IPC and section 25 of the Arms Act by the police of Police Station Sadar Muktsar, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr. PC. 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 deserves to be accepted in this context.

During the course of preliminary hearing, a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Ritu Bahri, J.) passed the following order on 15.10.2012:-

Counsel for the petitioners has referred to the allegations in the FIR where no injury has been attributed to Swaranjit Singh and Mal Singh. Mal Singh is 82 years old. The parties are co-sharers of the land and the dispute has arisen on account of sale of land made by Balwinder Singh, Rachhpal Singh, Rupinder Kaur, Jatinder Singh and Amarinder Singh more than their share. The other co-accused Jaswinder Singh, Jabarjang Singh and Kulwinder Singh alias Mintu have been granted regular bail on 19.9.2012 (Annexure P7).

Notice of motion for 7.1.2013.

Meanwhile, since no injury has been attributed to the petitioners, they are directed to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer. In the event of the arrest, they shall be released on bail by the Investigating Officer on their furnishing bail bonds/sureties to his satisfaction, subject to the conditions mentioned below, as envisaged in Section 438(2) Cr. PC :-

i. a condition that the person shall make themselves available for interrogation by Police Officer as and when required:

ii. a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

iii. a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

iv. such other condition as may be imposed under sub section (3) of Section 437, as if the bail were granted under that section.

At the very outset, the learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Balbir Singh, has acknowledged the factual matrix and stated that the petitioners have already joined the investigation and they are no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. Moreover, no injury is attributed to the petitioners in the FIR.

In the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of the facts & circumstances, emanating from the record, as described here-in-above, the instant petition is hereby accepted and the interim bail already granted to the petitioners, by virtue of order dated 15.10.2012 is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as envisaged u/s 438(2) Cr. PC. Needless to mention that in case the petitioners do not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of their bail, in this relevant direction.