Baljit Singh vs State Of Punjab
2022 Latest Caselaw 16966 P&H

                                                                      208
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

                   CRM-M No.23688 of 2022 (O&M)
                  Date of decision: 15th December, 2022

Baljit Singh
                                                              ... Petitioner
                                     Versus
State of Punjab
                                                             ... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:   Mr. G.S. Bedi and Ms. Savi, Advocates for the petitioner.
           Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab
           for the respondent/State.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

CM No.48269 of 2022

In view of the averments made in the application and in the

interest of justice, the same is allowed as prayed for and the document

(Annexure P-7) is taken on record.

CRM-M No.23688 of 2022

This is second petition of the petitioner filed under Section

439 Cr.P.C. in case bearing FIR No.43 dated 24.09.2017 under

Sections 365, 120-B IPC (Sections 302, 201, 364 IPC added later on)

registered at Police Station Ghanie Ke Bangar , District Gurdaspur,

Punjab.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that

subsequent to the dismissal of the previous petition seeking similar

relief on 16.11.2021, as many as 29 prosecution witnesses out of 43

1 of 3

cited, have been examined coupled with the fact that the main accused

Ranjit Singh, who was attributed the motive behind the murder of

deceased Amarjit Kaur, stands acquitted by the trial Court vide

judgment dated 11.11.2022.

Learned counsel, while inviting the attention of this Court

to the FIR, which has been annexed as Annexure P-1, inter alia

contends that neither was the petitioner named in the FIR in question

nor any suspicion raised qua his involvement in the disappearance and

alleged murder of deceased Amarjit Kaur. It has been submitted that

the motive to commit the murder of Amarjit Kaur was the alleged illicit

relationship between her and co-accused Ranjit Singh having turned

sour, however, said Ranjit Singh stands acquitted, as already submitted

earlier, by the trial Court. He further submits that the petitioner was

nominated as an accused subsequently and that too, on a confession

allegedly made by co-accused Ranjit Singh before the police, which is

of very weak evidentiary value and still further, admittedly the dead-

body of the deceased has not been recovered till date. Learned counsel

furthermore contends that since all the material witnesses, including the

husband of the deceased, have been examined, there is no likelihood of

the petitioner influencing the witnesses to depose in his favour much

less tamper with any other evidence.

Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer

and submissions made by the counsel opposite, on instructions, has not

disputed that the main accused i.e. Ranjit Singh, who was attributed the

motive to commit the crime in question, and who allegedly strangulated

2 of 3

the deceased along with the petitioner, had since been acquitted by the

trial Court. Learned State counsel has however submitted that the

motorcycle on which the main accused Ranjit Singh as well as the

petitioner allegedly abducted the deceased before committing the crime

in question, was recovered from the house of the petitioner himself. He

further submits that the petitioner had earlier absconded, soon after the

registration of the FIR in question and was arrested on 21.01.2021.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

relevant material on record.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove

coupled with the petitioner being in custody since 21.01.2021, the trial

is unlikely to conclude in the near future as 14 prosecution witnesses

remain to be examined. Since all the material witnesses have been

examined, further incarceration of the petitioner shall serve no useful

purpose. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to

bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However,

nothing contained hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression

of opinion on the merits of the case.

                                         (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
                                                JUDGE
December 15, 2022
rps
           Whether speaking/reasoned                   Yes/No
           Whether reportable                          Yes/No




                                3 of 3