IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM-M-24736 of 2011 (O&M) Decided on 30.11.2011 Balraj Singh @ Baja --Petitioner vs. State of Punjab --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. P.S.Hundal,Sr.Advocate, with Mr.Neeraj Mahajan,Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. A.S.Rai, DAG, Punjab Mr.J.S.Thind,Advocate, for the complainant RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,J: (ORAL) CRM-64501 of 2011 Allowed as prayed for. CRM-M-24736 of 2011 This is a petition for bail pending trial in a case registered vide FIR No. 38 dated 23.5.2010, under Sections 302,324,325,307,323,336, 506, 148 and 149 of the IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 Arms Act at Police Station Ghanie Ke Bangar, District Gurdaspur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a case of cross fight in which one person on the side of the complainant suffered fire arm injury and died, whereas the petitioner side also suffered injuries dangerous to life. He further submits that role attributed to the petitioner is that he had caused two injuries i.e. one on the right side of the head of Randeep Singh which has been found to be an injury under Section 323 of CRM-M-24736 of 2011 (O&M) -2- the IPC and the second injury he had caused on the fore head of Simarnjit Singh which has been found to be an injury under Section 325 IPC. Learned counsel further submits that two other co-accused Gurpal Singh and Rachhpal Singh have already been granted regular bail by this Court. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody from 26.5.2011. Learned State Counsel assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner was a member of an unlawful assembly who had committed the murder of Sukhwinder Singh. He further submits that the persons who are on bail are also threatening the complainant party. In this ragard, he refers to the two complaints Annxure R-6 and R-7 which have been brought on record. It is submitted that Gurpal Singh co-accused has been granted bail because he is alleged to have given dang blow on the back side of elbow of Randeep Singh and another dang blow on the left arm of Simarnjit Singh and these injuries have been declared to be simple in nature. He further submits that the other co-accused Rachhpal Singh who has also been granted regular bail had caused blow with a saria on the back of Jivanjot Singh who happens to be a witness in this case and that injury has been declared to be simple in nature. Learned counsel also submits that the case of the present petitioner cannot be equated with the other two co-accused who have been granted regular bail. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the document Annexure R-6 is a complaint alleged to have been given to the District & Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur on 15.9.2011 and the another complaint is Annexure R-7 about which he had moved the application for obtaining certified copy but that appliction has been returned with the CRM-M-24736 of 2011 -3- remarks by the Superintendent, Sessions Court that 'no such application has been received. He further submits that the petitioner has caused injury on the fore head of Simranjit Singh, and the role attributed to him is equal to the role played by Gurpal Singh and Rachhpal Singh which falls under Section 325 IPC which is bailable. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but without making any observations on the merits, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 30.11.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge