Punjab-Haryana High Court
Baljit Singh Alias Ballu vs State Of Punjab on 3 November, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:139949
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:139949
CRM-M-46633-2023 (O&M)
Reserved on: October 31, 2023
Date of Decision: November 03, 2023
Baljit Singh alias Ballu ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present: - Mr. Gaurav Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate for the applicant
in CRM-43629-2023.
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
By way of this petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.,
petitioner prays for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.113 dated
02.10.2018, under Sections 302, 201, 34, 397, 411 of IPC and Section 25
of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Khanauri, District
Sangrur. This is the second petition. The earlier petition bearing
No.CRM-M-10359-2023 (O&M) was dismissed as withdrawn vide order
dated 19.05.2023 (Annexure P-6).
2. Status report by way of affidavit of Shri Parminder Singh,
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Moonak, District Sangrur,
along with custody certificate has been filed by the respondent-State.
3. As per prosecution allegations, as revealed from the status
report filed by the respondent-State, on 02.10.2018 Krishan Singh, Ex.
Sarpanch of village Khanauri, District Sangrur spotted dead body of an
unknown person near Ghaggar bridge, Khanauri, tied in clothes, which
appeared to have been thrown by some unknown persons with the
intention to dispose of the body. Police was informed. FIR was registered
against unknown persons. During investigation, Balwant Singh @ Banta
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:139949
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:139949
CRM-M-46633-2023
got recorded his statement as per which, he was conductor of truck
bearing registration No. PB-5Q-9829. He identified the dead body to be
of one Paramjit Singh, who was the driver on the aforesaid truck. It was
disclosed by him that he along with deceased Paramjit Singh had loaded
iron ore from Jharkhand for Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab on 29.09.2018
and had unloaded the truck at Mandi Gobindgarh. On that day, four
persons came on a motorcycle, disclosing that they were brokers and that
they will get the truck loaded from Koop Kalan, District Sangrur in lieu
of commission. Driver Paramjit Singh (deceased) consented to them for
the same. Those four persons revealed their identities as Harpinder Singh
@ Bhindu, Sarabjit Singh @ Sahib Singh, Mandeep Singh @ Jatinder
Singh and Baljit Singh @ Ballu (petitioner) and also exchanged their
mobile numbers. It was further disclosed by Balwant Singh @ Banta that
after this conversation, he left for Mandi Gobindgarh for his house;
whereas Paramjit Singh told him that he will get the truck loaded from
Koop Kalan through the aforesaid brokers and will unload the same at
Amritsar and will take him (Balwant Singh @ Banta) from his house.
Balwant Singh @ Banta told further that later on, he kept on waiting for
Paramjit Singh, but he did not come. He later on came to know that some
unknown persons had committed robbery of the truck from Paramjit
Singh and had killed him near village Khanauri. He suspected petitioner
and three others to be involved in the murder of Paramjit Singh.
4. On the basis of aforesaid statement, petitioner and three
others, i.e., Harpinder Singh @ Bhindu, Sarabjit Singh @ Sahib Singh,
Page no.2 out of 5 pages
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:139949
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:139949
CRM-M-46633-2023
Mandeep Singh @ Jatinder Singh were nominated on 04.11.2018 and
they were identified to be the same persons, who had approached
Balwant Singh @ Banta and deceased Paramjit Singh as brokers. The
statements of three of them was recorded. As per their disclosure
statements, on the intervening night of 01/02.10.2018, they along with
petitioner Baljit Singh @ Ballu had murdered Paramjit Singh by firing
bullet upon him and had snatched his 18 tyres trolla/truck bearing
registration No. PB-05Q-9829 and had further sold the same to one
Hanuman Singh S/o Gokal Ram of Narnaul, who runs a truck body repair
shop at Narnaul. The said truck/ trolla was recovered from Hanuman
Singh under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and he was nominated as an
accused and arrested on 14.11.2018. Said Hanuman Singh suffered
disclosure statement, as per which petitioner had brought the aforesaid
truck/trolla to his workshop on 03.10.2018.
5. After concluding the investigation, Harpinder Singh @
Bhindu, Sarabjit Singh @ Sahib Singh, Mandeep Singh @ Jatinder Singh
and Hanuman Singh were challaned. They were tried by the Court, but
were acquitted of the charges vide judgment dated 15.11.2022. Petitioner
in the meantime was declared proclaimed offender on 19.10.2019, as he
was evading his arrest. He was arrested on 07.09.2022 and was identified
by Balwant Singh @ Banta as fourth person, who was accompanying
Harpinder Singh @ Bhindu, Sarabjit Singh @ Sahib Singh and Mandeep
Singh @ Jatinder Singh as brokers. After completion of investigation qua
the petitioner, supplementary challan under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. was
Page no.3 out of 5 pages
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:139949
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:139949
CRM-M-46633-2023
presented on 25.11.2022. Charges were framed on 28.07.2023 and now
the case is fixed for 03.11.2023 for prosecution evidence.
6. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that
entire case of the prosecution is based upon circumstantial evidence; that
no overt act is attributed to the petitioner; that co-accused have already
been acquitted by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 15.11.2022
(Annexure P-4); that petitioner was not aware about the present FIR
registered against him and having been declared proclaimed offender on
19.10.2019. It is only on his arrest on 07.09.2022 that he came to know
about his false implication in this case. Still further, it is contended that
there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the crime, inasmuch as
no call details records have been collected to connect the petitioner with
the deceased or with the present occurrence. Learned counsel has also
drawn attention towards certain observations made in the judgment dated
15.11.2022 (Annexure P-4) qua co-accused, so as to contend that despite
number of toll plazas existing on the way from Mandi Gobindgarh to
Amritsar and from Amritsar to Koop Kalan having CCTV cameras
installed, no CCTV footage was taken into possession. Learned counsel
contends further that no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner,
who is in custody ever since 07.09.2022 and that trial may take time to
conclude. So, in all these circumstances, petitioner be allowed concession
of regular bail.
7. Strongly opposing the bail petition, learned State counsel
submits that petitioner has been duly identified to be one of the persons
Page no.4 out of 5 pages
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:139949
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:139949
CRM-M-46633-2023
with whom the deceased was last seen. Learned State counsel submits
that petitioner cannot take any benefit of the observations made by the
Trial Court during trial of co-accused. Still further, it is contended that
petitioner evaded arrest for a long period of more than three years and
had to be declared proclaimed offender on 19.10.2019 and then arrested
on 07.09.2022 and in case, he is granted the benefit of bail, trial may
never come to conclusion. By pointing out towards the gravity of the
offence, prayer is made for rejecting the bail petition.
8. I have considered submissions of both the sides and have
perused the record carefully.
9. Petitioner is specifically named to be one of the persons, who
was last seen with the deceased. The case is of course dependent upon
circumstantial evidence. Petitioner evaded arrest for long time and was
declared proclaimed offender. He cannot be allowed at this stage the
benefit of observations made by the Trial Court in the judgment of
acquittal qua co-accused.
10. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case
as have been discussed above and the gravity of the offence, but without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court does not find it
a fit case for granting the relief of regular bail.
As such, present petition is dismissed.
November 03, 2023 (DEEPAK GUPTA)
sarita JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
Page no.5 out of 5 pages
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:139949
5 of 5
