Swarnjit Singh vs State of Punjab

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Petitioner-Swarnjit Singh son of S. Piara Singh, has applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered against him, vide FIR No. 50 dated 14.02.2013, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 354, 323 and 50 IPC, by the police of Police Station Division No. 7 (Vardhman), Ludhiana, invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr. P.C. 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 anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context.

During the course of preliminary hearing, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Paramjit Singh, J.), has passed the following order on June 11, 2013:-

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. The only allegations against the petitioner are under Sections 354, 323, 506 IPC.

To come up on 11.07.2013.

Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall, however, join the investigation as and when called for and he will also abide by the conditions as specified u/s 438(2) Cr. P.C.

At the first instance the petitioner will join the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer on 13.06.2013 at 10.00 A.M.

At the very outset, on the instructions from ASI Harbhajan Singh, learned State Counsel has acknowledged the factual matrix and submitted that the petitioner 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. All the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the prosecution has not 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 other facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim bail already granted to the petitioner by this Court, by virtue of order dated June 11, 2013, is hereby made absolute, subject to the compliance of the conditions, as contemplated u/s 438(2) Cr. P.C.

Needless to mention that, in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of his bail, in this respect.