Punjab-Haryana High Court
Balwinder Singh @ Balwinder Kumar @ ... vs State Of Punjab on 22 October, 2024
Author: Kirti Singh
Bench: Kirti Singh
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138059
CRM-M-50990-2024 1
239
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-50990-2024
Date of Decision: 22.10.2024
Balwinder Singh @ Balwinder Kumar @ Vicky @ Jarman Baba
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH
Present:-. Mr. Anmol Puri, Legal Aid Counsel
for the petitioner.
Mr. Kamalpreet Bawa, AAG Punjab
*****
KIRTI SINGH, J.(Oral)
The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has
been invoked for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.117 dated
25.12.2022, under Section 379-B IPC registered at Police Station Thermal, District
Bathinda.
2. The facts of the present case are that on 24.12.2022 at about 2.45 p.m.
the complainant, who is a taxi driver, was present at Taxi Stand in Ratia where
one Rinku Singh had come there with a faulty car and the person accompanying
him namely Balwinder Kumar came to the complainant to hire his taxi to go to
Bathinda. When the complainant reached near Bathinda, the petitioner snatched
the key of the car of the complainant and fled away in same.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been
falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the alleged occurrence took
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138059
place on 24.12.2023 whereas the FIR was got lodged on 25.12.2023. The
petitioner has been in custody for 01 year, 02 months and 20 days. Learned
counsel submits that four more cases have been registered against the petitioner
and he is on bail in two cases. He further submits that charges have been framed
on 12.12.2023 and out of 16 prosecution witnesses, only 08 prosecution witnesses
have been examined till date.
4. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. As per the custody
certificate, the petitioner has undergone actual custody of 01 year, 02 months and
20 days. He further submits that there are four more cases registered against the
petitioner, however, in two cases he is on bail. He further submits that the charges
in the present case were framed on 12.12.2023 and out of 16 prosecution
witnesses, 08 prosecution have been examined. He, however, submits that there
are serious allegations against the petitioner and he is not entitled to the concession
of regular bail.
5. Heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
6. As regards the submission of learned State counsel that petitioner is
involved in four more criminal cases, reference is placed upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and
another, 2012 (2) SCC 382 in which, it is held that the facts and circumstances of
the present case are to be seen while deciding a bail application and the bail
application of the petitioner cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the
petitioner is involved in other/another case(s). The relevant portion of the said
judgment is reproduced herein-below:-
"As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138059
antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected.
In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the
accused in the case in which he has been charged and other
circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction
of the Court etc."
7. The veracity of the allegations leveled against the petitioner shall be
established during the course of the trial. Admittedly, the charges were framed and
08 prosecution witness have been examined till date. The petitioner has undergone
actual custody of 01 year, 02 months and 20 days. Therefore, this Court is of the
view that further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any purpose.
8. Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, lest it may
prejudice the trial, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be
released on regular bail on his furnishing adequate bail/surety bonds to the
satisfaction of the concerned learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. The petitioner
shall also abide by the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witness(s).
(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on the date
fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence
of which he is accused of, or for commission of which she is
suspected.
(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138059
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to
the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall
be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
10. However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression
of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court would proceed
independently of the observations made in the present case which are only for the
purpose of adjudicating the present bail petition.
(KIRTI SINGH)
JUDGE
22.10.2024
reena
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
