CRM-M-18366 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18366 of 2011 Date of Decision:12.12.2011 Manpreet Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CRM-M-18558 of 2011 Kampal Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CRM-M-18832 of 2011 Mandeep Kaur ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CRM-M-18833 of 2011 Daljit Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. SPS Sidhu, Advocate, Mr. PPS Duggal, Advocate Mr. Preetwinder Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of four petitions bearing CRM-M- 18366 of 2011 and CRM-M-18558 of 2011, CRM-M-18832 of 2011 and CRM-M-18366 of 2011 2 CRM-M-18833 of 2011, which have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.29 dated 22.6.2010 registered under Sections 363/368/120- B IPC at Police Station Thermal Plant, Bathinda in which Section 364-A IPC was added later on. The FIR is registered by Nandan Nagpal, who had alleged that on 17.6.2010 at 4.30 PM when he left Malout for Chandigarh in his Honda Car bearing No.CH-01-AB-8585, he received a call from Mobile No.78373- 10171 from a girl, who had asked him to meet her as she was earlier known to him. At about 8 PM, when he reached at the Thermal Plant, Bathinda, a girl driving golden colour Innova car came there. He was taken towards Bathinda-Muktsar road where her companion came and his hands and eyes were tied with a cloth. They kidnapped him by giving intoxicating injections and released him on 20.6.2010 near Muktsar. He also came to know that his car was recovered on 18.6.2010 from Village Ahli Ka in District Sirsa, Haryana. Counsel for the petitioners have submitted that in the first petition, the petitioner is in custody from 3.12.2010, in the second petition, the petitioner is in custody from 20.11.2010 and in the third and fourth petition, the petitioners are in custody from 25.11.2010. The attribution to the petitioner in the first petition is of a ransom call from Mobile No.78377-23935, to the petitioner in the second petition, is of driving Innova car, to the petitioner in the third petition is that she is the wife of the petitioner in the fourth petition and no role is attributed to the petitioner in the fourth petition. It is further submitted that Karamjit Kaur, the alleged co- accused who had made a call to the kidnapped person, has already been CRM-M-18366 of 2011 3 granted bail by the trial Court and another accused Jasbir Singh whose car was used, has been granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court in CRM- M No.8775 of 2011 on 28.4.2011. It is the common case of the petitioners as well as the State that no ransom has been paid in this case and no harm is caused to the kidnapped person. It is also the conceded position that all the petitioners are neither previous convicts nor any case is pending against them. This Court had adjourned this case for the purpose of recording statement of the complainant and his father, but according to the State counsel, the said witnesses have not turned up to record their statement despite the fact that they were bound down on the last date of hearing. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but without making any observation on the merits, all the four bail applications are hereby allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with two local heavy sureties. A photocopy of the order be placed on the file of each connected case. December 12, 2011. ( Rakesh Kumar Jain ) sk Judge