CRM No. M- 6182 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M- 6182 of 2011 Decided on:- 03.06.2011 Baljinder Singh @ Sabi and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. P.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S.Chandumajra, DAG, Punjab. Mr. K.K.Goel, Advocate for the complainant. **** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J(Oral) On 27.4.2011 while considering the case of the petitioners, following order was passed by this Court:- “CRM No. 13871 of 2011 CRM allowed. Annexures R-1 to R-5 taken on record. CRM No. M-6182 of 2011 This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No. 58 dated 30.3.2010, under Sections 304/302 IPC registered at Police Station Lehra, District Sangrur. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners were originally exonerated by the police and now have been summoned under Section 319 Cr. P. C, and that they were falsely implicated. Learned counsel for the complainant has, however, argued that as far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, he is a harcore criminal and infact has been declared a proclaimed offender in another case. Learned counsel for the CRM No. M- 6182 of 2011 2 petitioners has countered this by saying that the order declaring him a proclaimed offender has been challenged by way of CRM No. M-2241 of 2011 and that matter is now fixed for 17.5.12011. In my considered opinion it would be appropriate if this petition is heard alongwith that case. In the meantime since there are no allegations of being a hardcore criminal against petitioner no.2, his arrest shall remain stayed. Adjourned to 17.5.2011. To come up along with CRM No. M-2241 of 2011.” Counsel for the petitioners has placed on record the order dated 17.5.2011, passed in CRM NO. M-2241 of 2011 filed by the petitioner challenging the order of Proclaimed Offender. A perusal of the said order clearly depicts that order declaring the petitioner as a proclaimed offender was on a mistaken belief and he was treated as a co-accused despite he being acquitted by this Hon'ble Court. In this view of the matter, the allegations against the petitioner with regard to he being a proclaimed offender does not sustain. Counsel for the complainant has vehemently argued that there are three more FIRs pending against the petitioner, out of which one relates to the possession of a fire arm and other two relates to non injury cases although allegations are with regard to attempt to murder and Section 307 IPC has been invoked. According to the counsel for the petitioner, a compromise has been entered between the parties in those FIRs and therefore, the same are also not likely to have any effect on the case in hand. He further contends that the petitioner would surrender before the trial Court and will continue CRM No. M- 6182 of 2011 3 to appear and face the trial. He further contends that the petitioner would comply with all the conditions which may be imposed by the trial Court while releasing him on bail. In view of the fact that the petitioners have only been summoned under Section 319 Cr. P. C and initially the petitioners were found to be innocent persons and were placed in column no.2, the matter with regard to the allegations against the petitioners would be dependent upon the evidence which would be led before the trial Court and the final conclusion will drawn as per the trial proceedings. As of now, the present application is allowed. Petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court on 8.6.2011 where both the petitioners shall be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. It would be open for the complainant to approach for cancellation of bail in case the petitioner(s) violates any of the conditions of the bail. 03.06.2011 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) mamta JUDGE