IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc No. M-16619 of 2009 Date of decision : 31.07.2009 Bakhtawar Singh ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab and another ....Respondents BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG Punjab. Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate for respondent No. 2. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This is a petition for regular bail in a complaint case titled as Prem Singh Vs. Jatinder Singh and Ors. under Sections 143, 452, 326, 323, 148, 149 IPC pending in the Court of JMIC Anandpur Sahib. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 326, 148, 149 IPC. According to the counsel, the case is triable by the Magistrate. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody for almost 2 months by now. According to the counsel, present complaint is a counter-blast to the FIR registered at the instance of petitioner's side. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner remained a proclaimed offender during the pendency of the trial. It appears that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court Crl. Misc No. M-16619 of 2009 -2- praying for anticipatory bail (Crl. Misc. No. M-26340 of 2008). The petition was disposed of by an order, operative part whereof reads as under:- “As the petitioner has been declared a proclaimed offender, he is not entitled to the grant of pre-arrest bail. However, in case the petitioner surrenders before the trial court within a fortnight from today, his prayer for regular bail shall be considered and decided on the same day. The trial court may, if deemed appropriate, take into consideration the fact that the petitioner has been summoned in a complaint case, and has been appearing befor ethe Court pursuant to interim orders passed by this Court.” After petitioner surrendered before the trial court pursuant to the aforesaid order, he is in custody. Keeping in view the fact that case is triable by the Magistrate and petitioner has been summoned pursuant to a complaint case, no useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody during the pendency of the trial. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar. This, however, will be subject to heavy surety and any other condition which the trial court may deem fit to impose in the facts and circumstances of the case. 31.07.2009 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE