Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amit Kumar Alias Ravi Pardhan vs State Of Punjab on 11 August, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:104848
2023:PHHC:104848
CRM-M-39711-2023 (O&M) AND
CRM-M-39745-2023 (O&M)
107 (2 cases)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: August 11, 2023
1. CRM-M-39711-2023 (O&M)
Amit Kumar @ Ravi Pardhan
....Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab
....Respondent
2. CRM-M-39745-2023 (O&M)
Bagga @ Pagga
....Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Present:- Mr. Munish Kumar, Advocate for petitioner(s).
Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Additional AG Punjab.
*****
ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)
Vide this common order and judgment, above-mentioned two cases are
being disposed of since they arise out of the same FIR. For brevity, recitals are taken
from CRM-M-39711-2023.
2. After being declined anticipatory bail by the trial Court, petitioners, in both
the petitions, before this Court seek their release on anticipatory bail in a case bearing
FIR No.72dated 29.05.2021, registered under Sections 302, 336, 506, 148 read with
Section149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and Sections 25 and 27 of
Arms Act, 1959 (for short 'Arms Act'), at Police Station, Sadar Ferozepur, District
Ferozepur.
3. Per First Information Report (FIR), on May 29, 2021, at approximately
02:00 p.m., all the accused named in the FIR gathered outside the house of the
complainant (Vijay Kumar). David, also known as Laddi, and Rishu were involved in a
fight with the complainant's younger brother, Sonu, who is also known as Chooha. A
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:104848
2023:PHHC:104848
CRM-M-39711-2023 (O&M) AND
CRM-M-39745-2023 (O&M)
Panchayat (local council meeting) was convened at the house of co-accused Mohinder
Pal, who is the complainant in a cross-version case. Meanwhile, all the accused
assembled outside the complainant's house and searched for the complainant's nephew,
Jaffar, but they did not find him and left the premises. At around 4:00 p.m., when the
Panchayat was convened at Mohinder Pal's house, David, armed with a pistol, along with
Akash, Abbi, Jagga, Bagga (petitioner in CRM-M-39745-2023), Rinku, Samson, and
Ravi Pardhan (petitioner in CRM-M-39711-2023), opened an attack upon Sonu. As a
result, Sonu suffered a gunshot wound and was thrown by the assailants from the roof of
the house. Eventually, petitioners, David, Rinku, and the other accused fled from the
scene of occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that it is a case of version and
cross-version. Petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further
submits that no specific allegation has been levelled in the FIR against them by the
complainant. He further contends that following registration of cross-case, complainant
got recorded his supplementary statement on 07.06.2021 after unexplained delay of more
than 9 days, therefore, false implication of the petitioner cannot be ruled out.
4.1. Learned counsel further submits that co-accused of the petitioners, namely
Mohinder Pal has been granted concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide
orderdated22.03.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed in CRM-M-59439-2022. Petitioners are
entitled to be released on bail on parity with the aforesaid co-accused.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Gurnam
Singh, opposes the bail petition. He submits that petitioners have committed a serious
offence. Petitioners were specifically named in the statement of complainant. Petitioners
along with other accused gave beatings to brother of complainant. They threw his brother
from terrace after firing shots on him. Brother of the complainant succumbed to firearm
injuries. He further submits that if petitioners are released on anticipatory bail, they may
tamper with evidence and/ or influence/ intimidate the witnesses and also flee from trial
proceedings. He further urges that no parity can be claimed by petitioners with co-
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:104848
2023:PHHC:104848
CRM-M-39711-2023 (O&M) AND
CRM-M-39745-2023 (O&M)
accused Mohinder Pal, who has not been attributed any specific role except that the
occurrence took place at the house of co-accused Mohinder Pal.
6. I have heard rival contentions of learned counsels for the parties and have
gone through the case file.
7. In this case, petitioners along with his co-accused had given beatings to
Sonu @ Chuha (brother of complainant) and threw him from terrace after firing shots at
him resulting in death of Sonu @ Chuha. The offence committed by the petitioners is
grievous in nature.
8. Given the nature of offence committed by the petitioners, in my opinion,
they are not entitled for the concession of anticipatory bail. Conduct of the petitioners
does not entitle them to the indulgence from this Court. I am of the view that petitioners
are required for custodial interrogation and are not entitled to any concession of grant of
anticipatory bail, as possibility of misusing the same by petitioners cannot be ruled out at
this stage. I find force in the contention of learned State counsel that in case petitioners
are let out at this stage, there is every possibility of their tampering with evidence and
influencing the witnesses and/or fleeing from trial proceedings.
9. As an upshot, no indulgence is warranted by this Court to grant concession
of anticipatory bail to petitioners. Instant bail petition is thus dismissed.
10. It is made clear that any observations and/or submissions noted hereinabove
shall not have any effect on merits of the case as the same are for the limited purpose of
disposal of the instant bail petition alone and learned trial Court shall proceed in
accordance with law without being influenced with this order, if/ when any fresh bail
application is moved by the petitioners.
11. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA)
JUDGE
August 11, 2023
mahavir
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:104848
3 of 3
