Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurjit Singh Alias Daljit Singh vs State Of Punjab on 24 September, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:132080
CRM-M-41955-2024 1
101.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-41955-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 24.09.2024
Gurjit Singh alias Daljit Singh .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURBIR SINGH
Present: Mr.Arshdeep Singh Sivia, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Avneet, AAG, Punjab.
----
GURBIR SINGH, J (ORAL)
CRM-38714-2024
This application has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS
for placing on record MLR of Harjit Singh (Annexure P-4) and application
by Sumandeep Kaur to Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar (Rural)
(Annexure P-5).
For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed
and documents as Annexure P-4 and P-5 are taken on record, subject to all
just exceptions.
Main case:
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of
BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.
62 dated 07.07.2024 under Sections 103, 115(2), 118(1), 191(3), 190 of
BNS registered at Police Station Ramdas, Amritsar Rural.
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:132080
2. The case in question was registered on the statement of the
complainant Gurbhej Singh with the allegations that on 06.07.2024 at about
9:00 P.M, he and his relative Gurdev Singh had gone to their fields on a
motorcycle to check the paddy crop. On reaching there, they were checking
the water with the help of torch. However, in the light of torch, the
complainant Gurbhej Singh saw that Harjit Singh armed with spear, Jagjit
Singh armed with datar, Lakha Singh armed with datar, Makhan Singh
armed with kirpan and Gurjit Singh (present petitioner) armed with dang
were present at that place. For having dispute with them, Harjit Singh gave
blow with spear towards Gurdev Singh which hit left side of chest of
Gurdev Singh. Gurdev Singh fell down. Gurjit Singh gave stick blows to
Gurdev Singh. Then Jagjit Singh gave blow with datar on the left arm of
the complainant. Makhan Singh gave blow with kirpan to the complainant.
Complainant stepped towards backside to rescue himself and blow struck
on the left bicep of the complainant. He raised alarm and all the assailants
fled away from the spot with their respective weapons. Complainant and
Mandeep Singh had taken away Gurdev Singh to the hospital where Gurdev
Singh was declared as brought dead.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter-alia submits that as per
version of the prosecution, petitioner was armed with dang. He gave stick
blows to Gurdev Singh. The injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in
nature. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation. Reliance has been
placed on judgments passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurbaksh Singh
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:132080
Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab, 1980(2) SCC 565; State of Rajasthan Vs.
Balchand: AIR 1977 SC 2447; Gudikanti Narasimhulu Vs, Public
Prosecutor, (1978) 1 SCC 240 and Dataram Singh Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh, (2018) 3 SCC 22.
4. Notice of motion.
5. Ms. Avneet, AAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on
behalf the respondent-State. A copy of the petition be supplied to her during
the course of the day.
6. Mr. Karanjit Singh, Advocate also put in appearance on behalf
of the complainant. He has filed his Vakalatnama in the Court today and the
same is taken on record. It is argued that the petitioner and co-accused in
furtherance of their common object caused injuries to Gurbhej Singh and
Gurdev Singh. The other accused while armed with blunt weapons and
petitioner with dang, gave blows to Gurdev Singh who succumbed to the
injuries. The petitioner has actually participated in the crime.
6. I have heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.
7. At the time of considering the anticipatory bail, the Court is
required to consider factors such as the nature and the gravity of the
offence, the role attributed to the petitioner and the specific facts of the
case. Reliance is placed on Pratibha Manchanda and another Versus
State of Haryana and another, 2023(3) RCR (Criminal) 511. The extract
of said judgment reads as under:-
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:132080
"17. In Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of
Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, this Court carefully
considered the principles established by the Constitution
Bench in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2
SCC 565 case. After a thorough deliberation, this court arrived
at the following conclusion:
"112. The following factors and parameters can be taken into
consideration while dealing with anticipatory bail:
(i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of
the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is
made;
(ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to
whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on
conviction by a court in respect of any cognizable offence;
(iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice;
(iv)The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or
other offences;
(v) Where the accusations have been made only with the object of
injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her;
(vi) Impact of grant of anticipatory bail, particularly in cases of
large magnitude affecting a very large number of people.
Xxx xxx xxx"
18. In Sushila Aggarwal Versus State (NCT of Delhi),
(2018) 7 SCC 731, the Constitution Bench reaffirmed that
when considering applications for anticipatory bail, courts
should consider factors such as the nature and gravity of the
offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the specific
facts of the case.
19. The relief of Anticipatory Bail is aimed at safeguarding
individual rights. While it serves as a crucial tool to prevent
the misuse of the power of arrest and protects innocent
individuals from harassment, it also presents challenges in
maintaining a delicate balance between individual rights and
the interests of justice. The tight rope we must walk lies in
striking a balance between safeguarding individual rights and
protecting public interest. While the right to liberty and
presumption of innocence are vital, the court must also
consider the gravity of the offence, the impact on society, and
the need for a fair and free investigation. The court's discretion
in weighing these interests in the facts and circumstances of
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:132080
each individual case becomes crucial to ensure a just
outcome."
8. In the instant case, injuries were caused to deceased Gurdev
Singh in furtherance of common object of unlawful assembly. The
petitioner actually participated in the crime and also gave dang blow on the
deceased. No doubt, the cause of death is due to injuries to left lung and
heart, but investigation is going on. So, custodial interrogation of the
petitioner is necessary.
9. In the light of above discussion, this Court is of the view that
it is not a case where the petitioner is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.
10. Anything observed hereinabove shall have no effect on the
merits of the case as it is only for the purpose of deciding the present
petition.
(GURBIR SINGH)
JUDGE
24.09.2024
renu
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
5 of 5
