Ashok Kumar vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 3646 P&H

REENA
2023.04.11 1

217 2023:PHHC:049267
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Misc. No. M-3182 of 2023
Date of Decision: April 11, 2023

Ashok Kumar

desees Petitioner

versus
State of Punjab

seve Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL

ke

Present:- Mr. Ankur Malik, Advocate
for the petitioner

Mr. Kamalpreet Bawa, AAG Punjab

Mr. Umesh Sharma, Advocate
for the complainant

3K 2k 3k

Sudhir Mittal, J. (Oral)

Status report dated 11.04.2023 has been filed in the Court. The same is taken on record. A copy of the same has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner .

The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 283 dated 02.11.2022, registered at Police Station Model Town, District Hoshiarpur under Sections 307, 148, 149 IPC and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody for over 05 months and there is no other criminal case pending/decided against him. The present case was registered because he fired shots at attackers injuring two of them. These shots were fired with a licensed revolver and in exercise of right of self defence. The petitioner is the owner of sweet shop and the fight was initiated by the complainant side as they were demanding various items

vithout making any payment. Since the complainant side was the aggressor a

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/ judgment

Chandigarh

REENA

2023:PHHC:049267

DDR has been registered against them. The trial is not likely to be concluded at an early date as only challan has been presented as yet. Thus, the petitioner may be granted regular bail.

Custody certificate dated 09.04.2023 checked by Sh. Anurag Kumar, Superintendent of Central Jail, Hoshiarpur has been filed in Court. The same is taken on record. A perusal thereof shows that the petitioner has undergone actual custody of 05 months and 05 days and there is no other criminal cases pending/decided against him.

Learned State counsel concedes that charge has not yet been framed and that the police investigation shows that the complainant side was the aggressor.

Learned counsel for the complainant submits that gun shot injury has been caused by the petitioner which is in excess of right of self defence. Thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail.

From the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, it appears that the petitioner used his licensed revolver as a measure of self defence. It is also clear that he is a shopkeeper with no criminal record. He has been in custody for 05 months and 05 days and the trial is not likely to be concluded at an early date. Thus, I deem it appropriate to grant regular bail to the petitioner. The petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty

Magistrate, concerned.

April 11, 2023 [SUDHIR MITTAL] reena JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

2023.04.11 16:26 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/ judgment

Chandigarh