CRM-M-36128 of 2011 - 1 - CRM-M-36231 of 2011 CRM-M-36776 of 2011 CRM-M-37030 of 2011 CRM-M-38576 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M-36128 of 2011 Date of Decision: 22.12.2011 Makhan Singh . . .Petitioner Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CRM-M-36231 of 2011 Date of Decision: 22.12.2011 Harsimrandeep Singh . . .Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CRM-M-36776 of 2011 Date of Decision: 22.12.2011 Sukhwinder Singh @ D.C. . . .Petitioner Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CRM-M-37030 of 2011 Date of Decision: 22.12.2011 Ravinder Singh . . .Petitioner Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CRM-M-38576 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.12.2011 Surjit Singh . . .Petitioner Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Yogesh Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CRM-M-36128 of 2011). CRM-M-36128 of 2011 - 2 - CRM-M-36231 of 2011 CRM-M-36776 of 2011 CRM-M-37030 of 2011 CRM-M-38576 of 2011 Mr.H.R. Nohria, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CRM-M-36231 of 2011). Mr.P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CRM-M-36776 of 2011). Mr.Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CRM-M-37030 of 2011). Mr.Satish Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CRM-M-38576 of 2011). Mr.K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Mr.Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate, for the complainant. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of five petitions namely, CRM-M-36128 of 2011 titled as “Makhan Singh Vs. State of Punjab” (for short ‘Ist petition’), CRM-M-36231 of 2011 titled as “Harsimrandeep Singh Vs. The State of Punjab” (for short ‘IInd petition’), CRM-M-36776 of 2011 titled as “Sukhwinder Singh @ D.C. Vs. State of Punjab” (for short ‘IIIrd petition’), CRM-M-37030 of 2011 titled as “Ravinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab” (for short ‘IVth petition’) and CRM-M-38576 of 2011 titled as “Surjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab” (for short ‘Vth petition’). All the aforesaid petitions have been filed for bail in which Ist and Vth petitions are filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) whereas IInd, IIIrd and IVth petitions are filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case registered vide FIR No.44 dated 21.6.2011 under Sections 302, 307, 323, 447, 448, 511, 427, 148, 149 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 25/27/30/54/59 of the Arms Act, 1959 (for short ‘the Act’) at Police Station Sadar Sunam, District Sangrur. It is submitted by learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners that one Gurjant Singh has lost his life in the occurrence dated 21.6.2011 who was allegedly shot down by Ram Singh alias Rami CRM-M-36128 of 2011 - 3 - CRM-M-36231 of 2011 CRM-M-36776 of 2011 CRM-M-37030 of 2011 CRM-M-38576 of 2011 (non-applicant) and Gurtej Singh (complainant) had suffered injuries at the hands of Budh Singh. It is further submitted that Ram Singh had also caused fire arm injury to Harwinder Singh and Karnail Singh had caused simple injury to Gurtej Singh with Soti whereas Karamjit Singh and Sukhjinder Singh had raised lalkara. It is also submitted by learned counsels for the petitioners that the petitioner in IInd petition is in custody since 16.7.2011, the petitioner in IIIrd petition is in custody since 18.08.2011 and the petitioner in IVth petition is in custody since 28.6.2011. In the Vth petition, notice of motion is issued and on the asking of the Court, K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G. Punjab accepts notice. Copy of the petition has been supplied to him in Court. He has submitted that since Investigating Officer is present in Court, therefore, he would argue this bail application as well. Learned counsels for the petitioners have submitted that when the FIR was registered only Ravinder Singh (petitioner in IVth petition) was named but later on, in the statement of Harwinder Singh 8 more persons were included, who had named Surjit Singh and Harsimrandeep Singh. Thereafter, the statement of other eye-witness Avtar Singh was recorded by the Police, who had named 7 more persons including Makhan and Sukhwinder Singh. It is submitted that even according to their statements none of the petitioners referred to hereinabove had participated in the alleged crime. The only allegations against them are that they were present and were armed. There is no allegation that they had either caused any injury to the deceased or to the injured witness. It is also argued that similarly situated co-accused namely Lakhwinder Singh @ Lucky has already been granted regular bail by this Court in CRM-M-29777 of 2011 vide order dated 11.11.2011. Learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the bail applications hereinabove but he could not point out any overt act on the part of the petitioners herein of either causing any injury to the deceased or to the witnesses or even lalkara. They have submitted that the petitioners were present at the place of occurrence with arms which had emboldened the CRM-M-36128 of 2011 - 4 - CRM-M-36231 of 2011 CRM-M-36776 of 2011 CRM-M-37030 of 2011 CRM-M-38576 of 2011 main accused to commit the crime. It is also submitted that issue of taking possession was of Ram Singh, Budh Singh, Mal Singh, Karamjit Singh, Sukhwinder Singh and Karnail Singh, who had actually participated in the alleged crime and the present petitioners were not having a remote interest in that issue. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, Ist petition (CRM-M-36128 of 2011 titled as “Makhan Singh Vs. State of Punjab”) and Vth petition (CRM-M-38576 of 2011 titled as “Surjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab”) are allowed. The petitioners in both the said petitions are directed to join investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer. In the event of their arrest, they shall be released on bail by the investigating officer on their furnishing bail bonds to his satisfaction. They shall also abide by the conditions contained in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. IInd petition (CRM-M-36231 of 2011 titled as “Harsimrandeep Singh Vs. The State of Punjab”), IIIrd petition (“Sukhwinder Singh @ D.C. Vs. State of Punjab”) and IVth petition (“Ravinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab”) are hereby allowed and the petitioners in the said petitions, who were in custody, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate . A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) DECEMBER 22, 2011 JUDGE Vivek