In the Punjab and Haryana High Court,at Chandigarh.
Crl.Misc. No.M- 13572 of 2008
Decided on August 04,2008.
Gurmail Singh and others --- Petitioner
vs.
State of Punjab ---Respondent.
Present: Mr.Bipan Ghai, Sr.Advocate, with
Mr.Sandeep Gehlot,Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr.I.P.S.Sidhu,Sr.DAG, Punjab.
Rakesh Kumar Jain,J:
This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory
bail in a case FIR No.112 dated 13.5.2007, under Sections 302,148,149 IPC
and thereafter altered to offences under Sections 304, 120-B, 148 and 149 of
IPC, registered at Police Station, Sadar Khanna, District Ludhiana.
The aforesaid FIR has been registered on the statement of
Zanual Singh son of Mohammad. Navi, wherein it has been mentioned that
on 11.5.2007, Harinder Singh with his father Gurmail Singh and servant
Nikka Singh along-with 2/3 other persons had severely beaten his father
with hockey sticks and dandas on his head, arms and chest, as a result of
which he died on 12.5.2007.
Counsel for the petitioners has contended that both the sons of
the deceased, namely Zanual Singh and Yunus have made a statement
Crl.M.No.M-13572 of 2008 -2-
before the police that none of the petitioners were involved in the
commission of crime and also relies upon inquiry report prepared by the
S.P.(D) Annexure P-1,according to which, the petitioners have been
exonerated. He further relies upon the order of bail passed by this Court in
the case of co-accused namely, Sukhpal Singh and Harjit Singh in Crl.Misc.
No. M-9084 of 2008 decided on 07.5.2008.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondent has stated that so
far as the inquiry report made by S.P.(D) is concerned, that has not been
accepted by the S.S.P.,Ludhiana and the S.H.O. has been directed to
proceed further with the case on the basis of allegations levelled in the FIR.
In respect of the order granting bail to the co-accused, it is submitted that
the injuries attributed to Sukhpal Singh and Harjit Singh have been found to
be simple to the witnesses and no injury was caused by them to the
deceased. Therefore, the petitioners herein cannot be equated with aforesaid
Sukhpal Singh and Harjit Singh and no benefit of bail can be granted to
them in view of the fact that they have given serious injuries to the
deceased. Further argument raised by counsel for the respondent that
affidavits have been taken from the sons of the deceased by exerting
pressure upon them, though the offences are non-compoundable, therefore,
the said affidavits have no value in the eyes of law.
After hearing both the parties, without expressing any opinion
on the merits of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case for anticipatory
bail and the same is hereby dismissed.
August 04,2008 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge