CRM-M-28607-2011 [ 1 ] :::::: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28607-2011 Date of decision:23.11.2011 Partap Singh alias Chhota Palu ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. R.S.Dhull, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. C.M.Munjal, Advocate, for the complainant. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This is a petition for grant of regular bail in a pending trial case registered vide FIR No.105 dated 25.05.2010, under Sections 364-A, 325, 328, 323, 120-B of IPC at Police Station Patran, District Patiala. The FIR is registered by Suraj Bhan in which he has alleged that he was called by Raj Kaur at her house as she was in need of `25,000/- for the purpose of admission of her daughter in the college. While he was in her house, Mahal Singh came there in one white coloured Swift car along with 5 more persons who had overpowered the complainant and after tiding his hands and feet, made him unconscious by forcing him to inhale some intoxicant. Thereafter, they asked a ransom of `35 lacs which was settled at `25 lacs and after the money was paid, he was released, but during this process, he was severally beaten and tortured. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR. Moreover, there is a delay of 3 days in registration of the FIR because the occurrence took place on 21.05.2010 at CRM-M-28607-2011 [ 2 ] :::::: about 8.00 p.m. and the FIR was lodged on 25.05.2010 at about 7.30 p.m. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that co-accused Sanjay Kumar, Raj Kaur and Inder Singh have already been released on bail by this Court. He further submitted that a sum of `15 lacs was recovered from Sanjay Kumar who had filed CRM-M-30167-2010, which has been allowed by this Court on 05.01.2011. The other co-accused, namely, Raj Kaur who was the brain behind this occurrence, had also applied for bail before this Court vide CRM-M-30422-2010 and has been released on bail vide order dated 05.01.2011 and co-accused Inder Singh had applied for bail vide CRM-M-22791-2011, which has been allowed by this Court on 06.09.2011. He further submitted that the prosecution has already examined its material witnesses. Learned State Counsel, assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant, has submitted that the petitioner is involved in a serious offence of kidnapping for ransom. He also submitted that one of the co-accused, namely, Mahal Singh had filed CRM-M-12431-2011 but had withdrawn the same on 25.07.2011. It is further submitted that the orders of bail in the case of other co-accused are of no consequence for the purpose of granting bail to the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record from which I have found that the complainant was kidnapped from the house of Raj Kaur where he was probably called deceitfully; the recovery of 15 lacs is alleged to have been effected from Sanjay Kumar and one of the co-accused Inder Singh was also similarly placed with the petitioner, who have already been granted bail by this Court. It is also not disputed that the material witnesses of the prosecution have already been examined. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, but without making any observation on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. November 23, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE