Criminal Misc. No. M-32802 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-32802 of 2010 Date of decision : 21.01.2011 Jasbir Singh @ Heera ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. JBS Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail in a case registered against the petitioner vide FIR No. 133 dated 21.09.2009 under Sections 148, 302, 326, 149, 120-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Bholath, District Kapurthala. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no evidence on record to connect the petitioner with the commission of crime. According to him, the statements recorded by the police no where refers to the role of the petitioner. He thus submits that petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Learned State counsel has, however, opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that in the extra judicial confession made before Surat Singh it came out that the husband of Balwinder Kaur was doubting the Criminal Misc. No. M-32802 of 2010 2 character of his wife and thus he contacted the petitioner who further introduced him to the persons who ultimately committed the crime. He further submits that apart from extra judicial confession name of the petitioner had also figured in the statement of one Harnam Singh. Heard. It appears that in the instant case petitioner has been arraigned as an accused on the basis of certain evidence which came to the notice of the investigating agency during investigation. The extra judicial confession was made before the Surat Singh pointing out the role of the petitioner. The motive of the crime was also spelt out in the said statement. Under the circumstances, I am of the considered view that it is not a fit case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the present petition for regular bail is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. However, nothing stated herein above shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall consider the material and evidence as adduced before it in accordance with law. January 21, 2011 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE