Jaskaran Singh @ Bhollu vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 19 P&H

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

220-C
                                         CRA-S-514-2022

                                         Date of Decision: 04.01.2023

Jaskaran Singh @ Bhollu

                                                     .... Appellant
                   Versus

State of Punjab
                                                     .... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA

Present: -   Mr. S.S. Gill, Advocate for the appellant.

             Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.


ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL)

The appellant, namely, Jaskaran Singh @ Bhollu, has filed

the present appeal against the impugned order dated 28.09.2021 passed

by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby the

application filed by the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR

No. 79 dated 22.06.2021 registered under Sections 302, 323, 324, 427,

148 and 149 IPC read with Section Section 3 of the the Scheduled Castes

and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short-'the

SC & ST Act') at Police Station Sultanwind, District Amritsar, was

dismissed.

As per prosecution story, the present FIR was registered

against the appellant, on the basis of statement made by Hira Singh who

stated that on 21.06.2021 at about 10.30, he along with his brother Avtar

Singh Gill, Gautam S/o Shashi Kumar, Diwan Singh @ Sonu, Shankar

and Mandeep Singh were going from Taran Wala Pull to Kot Mit Singh

1 of 5

on Bolero bearing registration No. PB-23-R-7759, white colour being

driven by Shankar, aforesaid. When they reached ahead of chowk Peeran

Di Dargah, then another Bolero without number came from the front side.

The driver of the said Bolero stopped the vehicle in front of their vehicle.

Thereafter, Antar Kahlon armed with baseball, Happy armed with rod,

Jaskaran Bhollu armed with Datar, Ghulla, Gursimran Singh @ Gopi and

Jagroop Bambara armed with dangs and sticks alighted from the vehicle

and one Bullet motorcycle. Antar Kahlon raised 'lalkara' by abusing the

complainant party in the name of their caste and the assailants with their

respective weapons attacked upon the head of Avtar Singh Gill-brother of

the complainant Hira Singh, as a result of which, Avtar Singh Gill, fell on

the ground. The assailants caused injuries on the person of Avtar Singh

Gill with the respective weapons and fled away from the spot. While

leaving the spot, they also damaged the vehicle of the complainant party.

They all got admitted in Civil Hospital, Amritsar, where the doctor

declared Avtar Singh brought dead.

Learned counsel for the appellant, inter alia, contends that

appellant has falsely been implicated in the instant case. The prosecution

had examined the complainant-Hira Singh as PW-1, alleged eye-witness-

Shanker as PW-2, injured-Mandeep Singh as PW-3 and mother of

complainant and deceased (Avtar Singh Gill)-Amarjit Kaur as PW-4, but

all of them were declared hostile as they have not supported the

prosecution version. Copies of statements of PW-1 to PW-4 are annexed

with the appeal as Annexures A-1 to A-4. More so, 5 co-accused of the

2 of 5

appellant, namely; Harmandeep Singh, Anterpreet Singh, Gursimaranjit

Singh @ Gopi, Jashanpreet Singh Bablu and Bimalpreet Singh, have

already been acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment of acquittal dated

27.05.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track

Special Court, Amritsar, on the basis of statements of PW-1 to P-4. There

are only general and vague allegations against the appellant and no

specific role has been attributed to him. No offence under the SC & ST

Act, is made out. Learned counsel for the appellants has further

submitted that the present case is an abuse of the process of law. The

appellant is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called

by the Investigating agency and shall abide by any condition which may

be imposed by this Court. In support of his contentions, learned counsel

for the appellant has relied upon a judgment of this Court in Sudo

Mandal @ Diwarak Mandal vs. State of Punjub, 2011(2) RCR

(Criminal) 453.

On the other hand, learned counsel for State vehemently

opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants. He

contends that Section 18 of the Act create a specific bar in the grant of

anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. In support of his contentions,

learned counsel for the State has relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble the

Supreme Court in Prathvi Raj Chauhan vs. Union of India and others,

2020 (4) SCC 727.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully

gone through the relevant record.

3 of 5

Perusal of the file shows that the present case has been

registered against the appellant and his co-accused on the basis of

statement of complainant-Hira Singh, on the allegations that on

21.06.2021 at about 10.30, the appellant along with his co-accused

attacked upon the complainant party and caused injuries to the

complainant, his brother Avtar Singh Gill and one Mandeep Singh. The

brother of the complainant, namely, Avtar Singh Gill, had succumbed to

the injuries. However, while appearing in the witness box, complainant-

Hira Singh as PW-1, alleged eye-witness-Shanker as PW-2, injured-

Mandeep Singh as PW-3 and mother of complainant and deceased (Avtar

Singh Gill)-Amarjit Kaur as PW-4, have turned hostile as they have not

supported the prosecution version, as a result thereof, 5 co-accused of the

appellant, namely; Harmandeep Singh, Anterpreet Singh, Gursimaranjit

Singh @ Gopi, Jashanpreet Singh Bablu and Bimalpreet Singh, have

already been acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment of acquittal dated

27.05.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track

Special Court, Amritsar.

In view of the discussion made above, the present appeal is

allowed. The appellant-Jaskaran Singh @ Bhollu, is directed to join

investigation within 15 days from today and in the event of his arrest, he

shall be released on bail subject to furnishing personal bonds and surety

to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The appellant shall

join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall abide by

the conditions as provided under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

4 of 5

It is made clear, in case the appellant fails to join the

investigation, then the State shall be at liberty to move an application for

cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to him.

Any observation made here-in-above is neither an expression

of opinion on the merits of the case nor shall the trial Court advert to

these comments.

January 04, 2023                            (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA)
rishu                                              JUDGE


            Whether speaking/reasoned                Yes/No

            Whether Reportable                      Yes/No




                                5 of 5