High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Hari Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab on 4 May, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hari Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab on 4 May, 2009
Criminal Misc M-11153 of 2009                                              1


                                                                       1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                CHANDIGARH


                                Criminal Misc M-11153 of 2009


                                Date of decision: 4.5.2009


Hari Singh and ors                          ...Petitioners

                  Versus

State of Punjab                           ...Respondent




Present:     Mr Naresh Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners.
             Mr Sudhir Nehra, Addl AG Punjab.
             Mr GS Kaura, Advocate for the complainant.


S.S. SARON, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this petition

qua Amrik Singh @ Meeka @ Gulli (petitioner-2) and Gurdev Singh

(petitioner-3) has become infructuous as they have been arrested. It is

further submitted that the other petitioners namely petitioners-1 and 4 to 7

are liable to be granted the concession of pre-arrest bail. Petitioner-6 –

Sajjan Singh @ Sunny, it is submitted, was taking his examination of

Punjabi Elective at Government Senior Secondary School, Sultanpur Lodhi

on 16.3.2009 from from 2 to 5 p.m. He has referred to the Certificate (P6)

issued by the Principal, Dr Ram Rakha Memorial Senior Secondary School,

Sidhwan Dona. Besides, he has referred to the date sheet (P7). It is

submitted that petitioners-1 and 4 to 7 belong to respectable families and

have been falsely implicated. It is submitted that Hari Singh (petitioner-1)

(who is 72 years of old) and Taranjit Singh @ Tarni (petitioner-4) were
Criminal Misc M-11153 of 2009 2

empty handed; Amandeep Singh @ Guggu (petitioner-5) and Sajjan Singh

@ Sunni (petitioner-6), it is alleged, were carrying baseballs. Besides,

Parwinder Singh @ Mangi (petitioner-7) was carrying a stick and only role

of beating is attributed to them. It is also submitted that it is a case of

cross-version.

In response, learned counsel for the State and the complainant

have submitted that petitioners-1 and 4 to 7 have inflicted 16 injuries on the

person of Bhupinder Singh – complainant. Besides, 7 injuries on the person

of Amrik Singh and 2 injuries on the person of Sukha. It is submitted that

the petitioners-5 and 6 were carrying baseball bats. It is submitted that even

though, petitioners-1 and 4 are stated to be empty handed, yet they caused

injuries with their hands. Petitioner-7 had also beaten the injured –

Bhupinder Singh, Amrik Singh and Sukha. The allegations that Sajjan

Singh (petitioner-6) was taking his examination are false inasmuch as his

photographs at the time of the occurrence are there in which he is very much

present. Learned counsel for the State has also submitted that petitioners-4

to 7 are habitual in indulging in these types of activities and case FIR 334

dated 7.11.2008 stands registered against them at PS Nakodar for the

offences under Sections 323, 324, 341, 427, 148/149 IPC. Therefore, they

are not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the contentions of

the learned counsel for the parties.

The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of

Bhupinder Singh against 17 accused persons including the petitioners

whose names are mentioned in the FIR. It has been alleged that on

16.3.2009 in their village there was annual tournament. Complainant –

Bhupinder Singh and his father – Amrik Singh were present at their home.
Criminal Misc M-11153 of 2009 3

At about 4 p.m., Amarjit Singh @ Midda made a telephone call to the

complainant and called him at the stadium. The complainant was informed

that the Kabaddi match had started. The complainant went to the stadium

where Guggu (petitioner-5) was holding a Kirpan. Besides, other assailants

were present including the petitioners. Petitioners-1 and 4 were empty

handed. Petitioners – 5 and 6 were holding baseball bats and petitioner-7

was holding a stick. They caused severe beating to Bhupinder Singh, his

father – Amrik Singh and Sukha. On the basis of the allegations, the FIR has

been registered for the offences under Sections 307, 323, 324, 148/149 IPC.

The medical report (P3) of Bhupinder Singh – complainant shows that there

are asmany as 16 injuries on his person.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge Jalandhar, in his order

dated 16.4.2009 (P2) has observed that the petitioners had not spared any

part of the body of Bhupinder Singh injured on which they had not caused

injuries. Out of 16 injuries on his person, the majority were incised wounds.

It was observed that the assailants had attacked the complainant, his father

and his friend – Sukha with an intention to murder them. Therefore, the

petitioners indeed have caused serious injuries to the complainant side.

Besides, the learned counsel for the complainant has shown the photographs

of the annual tournament that was held in the village on the date of the

occurrence in which Sajjan Singh @ Sunny (petitioner-6), it is stated, was

present. The fact that he was taking his examination of Punjabi Elective is

incorrect. The Certificate dated 6.4.2009 (P6) issued by the Principal of Dr

Ram Rakha Memorial Senior Secondary School, Sidhwan Dona states that

the petitioner was taking his examination on 16.3.2009 from 2 to 5 p.m.

However, as per the date sheet (P7), all the papers except for those

mentioned therein which does not include Punjabi Elective, are from 2 to
Criminal Misc M-11153 of 2009 4

4.15 p.m. The occurrence in the case, it is stated, took place at 4 p.m.

Therefore, not much reliance can be placed on the Certificate (P6) where the

petitioner is stated to be taking his examination from 2 to 5 p.m. as the

examination as per the date sheet (P7) was only upto 4.15 p.m. Therefore, in

any case the plea of alibi is to be considered, if raised during trial. Hari

Singh (petitioner-1), it is stated, is 72 years old and he was empty handed

during the occurrence.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances, the petitioners -4

to 7 are not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail. Hari Singh

(petitioner-1), being 72 years of age, it would be just and expedient that

concession of pre-arrest bail is granted to him.

Accordingly, this petition qua petitionrs-4 to 7 is dismissed.

However, Hari Singh (petitioner-1), in the event of his arrest, shall be

admitted to bail on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the

satisfaction of the arresting/IO. He shall join investigation as and when

called and shall abide by the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC.




4.5.2009.                                               ( S.S.SARON )
ASR                                                         JUDGE