Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nikka Singh Alias Jaskaran Singh vs State Of Punjab on 20 March, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:040035
212
2024:PHHC:040035
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-13138-2024
DECIDED ON: 20.03.2024
NIKKA SINGH ALIAS JASKARAN SINGH
.....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB
.....RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Imaan Singh Khara, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG Punjab.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 439
Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.168, dated 22.11.2023,
under Sections 307, 365, 342, 323, 148, 149 of IPC, 1860 and Section 25 of Arms
Act (Section 326 of IPC added later on vide DDR No.24 dated 18.01.2024),
registered at Police Station Sangat, District Bathinda, Punjab.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not
present at the place of alleged occurrence. He further submits that as per the
prosecution story, the petitioner was alleged to be armed with a wooden stick and
gave beatings on the back of the complainant. He asserts that as per the medico
legal report there is no injury mark on the back of the complainant, which is alleged
to be given by the petitioner and all the injuries alleged to be sustained by the
complainant are simple in nature.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:040035
3. He has drawn attention of this Court to an order dated 01.03.2024
(Annexure P-5) passed in CRM-M-10196-2024, wherein main accused namely
Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakhi has already been granted the concession of bail by this
Court stating that the petitioner is at better footing from him.
4. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner,
which is taken on record. He prays for dismissal of the present petition stating that
petitioner has given beatings on the back of the complainant with wooden stick, but
does not controvert the fact that all the injuries are declared to be simple in nature.
5. Heard, learned counsel for the respective parties.
6. Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances and the fact
that the injuries referred hereinabove are simple in nature and main accused has
already been granted the bail by this Court added with the fact that after completion
of investigation challan stands presented on 20.02.2024, wherein 23 prosecution
witnesses has been cited and charges are yet to be framed, meaning thereby the
conclusion of trial shall take considerable time, no useful purpose would be served
by keeping the petitioner behind bars, which would amount to infringement of his
right to life and liberty, as enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India and is
against the principle "bail is a rule and jail is an exception", as has been time and
again discussed by this Court, while relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court
passed in Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. 2018(2) R.C.R.
(Criminal) 131.
7. In view of the above discussions made hereinabove, the petitioner is
directed to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the
satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
8. The present petition is hereby allowed.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:040035
9. However, it is made clear that anything stated hereinabove shall not be
construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
20.03.2024 JUDGE
Meenu
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
