Arshdeep Singh @ Lucky vs State Of Punjab
2022 Latest Caselaw 6493 P&H

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

224                                           CRM-M-19479 of 2022
                                              Date of Decision:11.07.2022


Arshdeep Singh @ Lucky
                                                           ---Petitioner

                  versus

State of Punjab
                                                           ---Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ

Present:    Mr. Sandeep Gahlawat, Advocate and
            Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Advocate
            for the petitioner

            Mr. Karanbir Singh, AAG, Punjab

                  ***

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL)

The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the petitioner for seeking concession

of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 08 dated 13.01.2022 under Sections

307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 25/27 of the Arms

Act, 1959 (Sections 302 and 201 IPC added later on) registered at Police

Station Sadar Amritsar, District Police Commissionerate Amritsar.

Briefly, the facts of the case are to the effect that on

12.01.2022, the applicant/accused Arshdeep Singh alias Lucky had gone to

the house of the complainant Satnam Singh at about 10.30 p.m. and has

been informed that his son Gursewak Singh since deceased was called by

Navdeep Singh alias Dimple at his house. The complainant received an

information at about 1:00 a.m. that his son Gursewak Singh was admitted in

Swift Hospital, Majitha Road, Amritsar due to a gun shot injury. The

deceased was shifted to Amandeep Hospital, Amritsar where Gursewak

1 of 4

Singh informed him that applicant-accused and his brother Navdeep Singh

alias Dimple had called Gursewak Singh to their house where they scuffled

with him and during said scuffle Navdeep Singh alias Dimple fired at him

from his revolver. He was thereafter taken from there by his friend Sahil

Sahbir and was got admitted in Swift Hospital. It was also informed that the

bullet in question hit him on the right side of his abdomen. Gursewak Singh

died on 16.01.2022 and consequently, offence under Section 302 of the

Indian Penal Code was also added.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the

true genesis of the occurrence has not been revealed and that as a matter of

fact, the petitioner had sustained injuries upon which the cross case/cross

version has also been registered for commission of offence under Section

307 of the Indian Penal Code vide General Diary No. 48. He contends that

the petitioner alongwith his family members was away to certain

neighbour's to celebrate the festival of Lohri on 12.01.2022. After some

time Gursewak Singh had also came in the vicinity. One Sahil Sahbir told

him that Gursewak Singh has come out of the house upon which he opened

the gate of the house whereupon Gursewak Singh and his brother Navdeep

Singh alias Dimple, Sahil Sahbir, Jaskaran Singh alias Janti started drinking

alcohol. Navdeep Singh alias Dimple called the petitioner after some time

and asked him to give him some food. The same was served. At about

12.15 a.m., when the petitioner was to serve chapatis to the deceased, he

took out a pistol from Jaskaran Singh @ Janti and fired a shot upon the

petitioner with an intention to kill him. When he took a step back in order

to save himself, the bullet hit in his right leg and went through. Navdeep

Singh alias Dimple brother of the petitioner, upon seeing the bullet hit the

2 of 4

petitioner, snatched the same from Gursewak Singh and fired a shot on

Gursewak Singh which hit on the right side of his abdomen The petitioner

as well as the deceased were both injured and were got admitted to the

hospital. He contends that offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal

Code was registered against the deceased Gursewak Singh.

It is further argued that the shot was fired by brother of the

petitioner in exercise of a right of private defence and that the petitioner is

in custody since 04.02.2022. He contends that the investigation is complete

and further custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required to

investigate into the matter.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that it

is a case of version and a cross version and a case under Section 307 of the

Indian Penal Code was also registered against deceased Gursewak Singh.

Upon a pointed query raised as to whether the shot upon the petitioner was

fired first or it was fired subsequent to the shot being fired upon Gursewak

Singh. The respondent-State, on instructions from ASI Gurpreet Singh

states that deceased Gursewak Singh had first fired the shot resulting in

injury to the petitioner herein and that the shot fired by brother of the

deceased was in response thereto. It is further contended that investigation

is concluded and the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions for

trial. Charge is yet to be framed. There are 38 witnesses that are to be

examined in the present case. It is also not disputed that the petitioner has

undergone actual custody of more than five months and that he does not

suffer from any other criminal antecedent and is not involved in any other

case.

I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

3 of 4

respective parties and have gone through the record with their assistance.

It is the case set up by the prosecution that the shot fired was

first fired upon the petitioner which injured the petitioner. Thereafter

brother of the petitioner snatched the pistol and fired upon Gursewak Singh.

The cross case vide General Diary No. 48 was also registered against the

deceased. The disputed questions of fact that arise in this case are required

to be debated at the time of final judgment in the trial court.

Taking into consideration the circumstances noticed above as

also the rights that have accrued in favour of the petitioner including the

right of private defence; absence of any attribution to the petitioner; and the

other allegation that he had called the deceased to his house on the festival

of Lohri, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be

released on bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the

satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat

and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or

indirectly.

The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an

expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the case

on the basis of available material.

The petition is allowed.

                                                      (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
                                                           JUDGE

11.07.2022
PARAMJIT
              Whether speaking/reasoned           :    Yes

               Whether reportable                 :    Yes/No

                                         4 of 4