Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manoj vs State Of Punjab on 29 January, 2024
Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill
Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill
2024:PHHC:011628
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-1599-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 29.01.2024
Manoj eee Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present: Mr. Ajeet Pal Singh Pakka, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. C.L.Pawar, Addl. AG, Punjab.
FIR No. | Dated Police Station Section/s
218 30.08.2022 | PS. Civil Lines, | Sections 324, 341, 148, 149
District Bathinda | IPC (Section 307 IPC
added later on vide DDR
No.38 dated 20.09.2023)
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in respect of aforementioned
FIR.
2. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Chote @ Chote Kumar,
the translated gist of which as extracted from Annexure P-1, is reproduced
hereinunder:
cede eneeeneeeees I work with my father at his tea stall opposite to Guru Nanak
School. Few days back Chocho r/o Dhobiana Basi Bathinda had a little
altercation with my brother Mintu, who were sent home after explaining.
Chocho named person was having grudge with us regarding the same. On
25.08.2022 at about 9.00 pm, I was going home with my cart after finishing
work at our tea-cart then Chocho, Ranjit r/o 25 gaj, Beant Singh Nagar,
VIMAL KUMAR
2024.01.30 16:38
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
VIMAL KUMAR
(2) CRM-M-1599-2024 (O&M)
Manjit Singh r/o Mehna Chowk, Manoj s/o Upinder Ram r/o Guru Tegh
Bahadur Nagar, Street No.20, Bathinda, Lakha @ Karan s/o Sita Ram,
Sooraj r/o street No.6/4 100 feet road, Bathinda and Gobind s/o Gangasar
r/o near Sai Baba Mandir, Kabaad Wali Dukan, Phase-3, Bathinda, who
were armed with swords, baseball and sticks, came to me and Chocho
raised lalkara that today Mintu's brother Chotu should not be spared, then
Chocho after saying so gave a blow of his hand held sword on me which hit
me on my right side of the head from sharp side. Lakha gave a blow of his
sword upon me I raised my right hand then it hit on the fingers of my right
hand from sharp side, then Manoj gave a blow of his sword, which hit on
my right foot then I fell down. Then Manjit gave a blow of his sword
which hit on my left palm. Then Manoj, Chocho, Sooraj, Manjit, Ranjit,
Lakha @ Karan etc. gave foot blows and fist blows to me while I was lying
down. Then my friend Sunil came at the spot, who after arranging the
conveyance got me admitted in Civil Hospital, Bathinda for treatment."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has falsely been
implicated in the present case and that the petitioner is neither attributed the
injury on the head of the complainant nor the grievous injury and that in
these circumstances, it cannot be said that the petitioner shared any common
intention or common object with the remaining co-accused so as to inflict
either any grievous injury or to make murderous assault. Learned counsel in
order to hammer forth his aforesaid contention places reliance upon a
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court reported as Naresh @ Nehru Vs. State of
Haryana, 2023 (2) Ori. Law Rev. 860, wherein it has been held that the
prosecution in order to be successful to convict a person with the aid of
Section 149 IPC has to establish with the help of evidence that the appellant
shared a common object and was a part of the unlawful assembly and was
fully aware of the offences likely to be committed to achieve the said object.
This Court has considered the aforesaid submissions.
2024.01.30 16:38
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
(3) CRM-M-1599-2024 (O&M)
5. There is certainly no dispute as regards the broad proposition of law spelt
forth in the above cited judgment. In the instant case, the petitioner
alongwith other persons, who are duly named, had attacked the complainant
with the help of swords, baseball bats and sticks. Four persons are stated to
be armed with swords. While one of them, namely, Chocho is alleged to
have inflicted a blow with sword on the head of the complainant, co-accused
Lakha is also alleged to have inflicted a blow with sword hitting the right
hand's fingers of the complainant. The petitioner (Manoj) is alleged to have
inflicted a blow with sword hitting on the right foot of the complainant. Co-
accused Manjit is also alleged to have inflicted a sword blow hitting on the
left palm of the complainant.
6. The aforesaid facts would prima facie show that the petitioner did have a
mens rea to cause injuries to the complainant and had gone duly armed with
a sword and as a matter of fact had also inflicted a injury to the complainant,
which is duly established from the medical record. The co-accused also
inflicted injuries with their swords including injury on head. The mere fact
that the injury on the head is attributed to co-accused Chocho would not
absolve the petitioner of his vicarious liability when the facts clearly suggest
that all accused armed with lethal weapons had made a murderous assault.
7. Having regard to the serious nature of allegations, this Court does not find
any special ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petition is
sans merit and is hereby dismissed.
29.01.2024 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
Vimal JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
VIMAL KUMAR
2024.01.30 16:38
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
