Punjab-Haryana High Court
Parvinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 6 June, 2023
2023:PHHC:081643
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
203
CRM-M-28497-2023
Decided on : 06.06.2023
Parvinder Singh
. . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab
. . . Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Jasinder S. Sekhon, Advocate
for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Arun Gupta, AAG, Punjab.
Assisted by ASI Charanjit Singh.
****
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
1. Mr. D.K.Sharma, Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of
complainant-Maninder Singh @ Debi and files his Vakalatnama in Court
today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office is
directed to tag the same at appropriate place.
2. Petitioner-Parvinder Singh, aged 18 years has filed the instant
petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for seeking bail in case FIR No.180 dated
05.09.2022 under Sections 324, 341, 34 IPC (Sections 323, 326, 307 IPC
were added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar Kharar, District SAS
Nagar (Mohali) during the pendency of trial.
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a young boy
of the age of 18 years only and for the incident dated 31.08.2022, initially,
aforementioned FIR was registered against the petitioner under Section 324,
341, 34 IPC. However, subsequent thereto, only on the basis of
supplementary statement dated 14.09.2022 of the injured/complainant-
Maninder Singh @ Debi, an offence under Section 307 IPC was added and
JAWALA RAM
2023.06.06 19:15 thus, there is no medical opinion, declaring the injury dangerous to life.
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
order/judgment
2023:PHHC:081643
Thus, it would be a moot question, whether the alleged offence under
Section 307 IPC, is made out or not ?
4. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that a concocted
version has been prepared by the complainant and said aspect is clear from
the facts recorded in the FIR also that despite being declared fit for statement
by the doctor on two occasions i.e. on 01.09.2022 and then 03.09.2022,
injured did not give the statement to the police, rather took time to discuss it
with the family members, and got recorded his statement first time on
05.09.2022.
5. Counsel for the petitioner also points out that vide order dated
16.02.2023 passed in CRM-M-46537-2022 (Annexure P-7), co-accused
Baljinder Kaur @ Bimla mother of the petitioner has been granted
anticipatory bail by this Court.
6. Learned State counsel while vehemently opposing the prayer
for bail submits that causing of more than one injury with a sharp edged
weapon i.e. kirpan is enough for the Court to come to a conclusion that
there was an intention to kill in the mind of the accused, thus, petitioner
deserves no leniency.
7. Learned State counsel also places on record the custody
certificate dated 06.06.2023 in Court today, which is taken on record.
Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place.
From the said custody certificate, it is clear that petitioner has
already undergone the custody period of 8 months and 22 days and is not an
accused in any other case.
8. Thus, considering the submissions addressed by both the
JAWALA RAM
2023.06.06 19:15
counsel and perusing the record carefully, this Court is of the view that the
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
order/judgment
2023:PHHC:081643
sustainability of the serious offence punishable under Section 307 IPC
would always be in question, but sending the petitioner, who is aged only
18/19 years in jail may prove fatal for his future career. Thus, by granting
concession of bail, he be afforded one chance to reform himself without
remaining inside jail for indefinite period.
9. On the other hand, it is also informed by learned State counsel
that investigation is complete and final report has been submitted and now,
charges have also been framed by the Court. Prosecution has to examine
total 17 witnesses and no witness has been examined till date.
10. Noticing all the aforementioned facts and circumstances, I
hereby order the petitioner to be released on bail subject to his furnishing
bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/CJM/Area
Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.
11. However, it is made clear that in case, petitioner is found
involved in any other similar activity in future or pressurizes the witnesses
of this case, it would be open for the prosecution /State of Punjab to seek
cancellation of the bail granted by this Court, today.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
June 06, 2023
k.nain
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
JAWALA RAM
2023.06.06 19:15
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
order/judgment
