Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ranjit Singh Alias Bihari vs State Of Punjab on 13 January, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:003114
CRM-M-65527-2024 (O&M)
227
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-65527-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 13.01.2025
RANJIT SINGH ALIAS BIHARI
.. Petitioner
Vs.
STATE OF PUNJAB
..Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present: Mr. Rahul, Advocate,
Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate and
Mr. Lupil Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab.
...
SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)
1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS,
2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.70
dated 15.07.2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections
379-B, 325, 323, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Balianwali, District
Bathinda.
2. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out by the
petitioner in the present petition) is as follows:-
"Copy of statement, statement of Gurdit Singh S/o Gurbachan
Singh S/o Nachattar Singh cast Jat R/o Bhunder aged about 25 years Mob
xxxxxx stated that I am resident of above said address and an agriculturist.
On dated 11.07.2020 at about 09:00 PM, I was going back to my home on
my bike from Govt school of my village after doing gym. At Bhairo Chowk
of my village where lights were on I had seen Bihari Singh armed with
iron rod, Ghuka Singh sons of Gurdial Singh armed with Ghope of iron.
Nikka Singh S/o Tete Singh armed with Kassian Iron, Dadde Singh S/o
Janta Singh armed with axe iron and Makhi Singh S/o unknown and some
unknown persons were standing there. Gopal Singh S/o Gurdial Singh
armed with stick and raise Lalkara that Gurdit Singh be tough a lesson for
made allegations of snatching purse. On hearing so Bihari Singh had
given two blows of iron rod on my head which hit on left side and right
side of my head. I fell down from my bike. Nikka Singh given blow Kassian
iron on my left leg due to which my leg fracture. Ghukka Singh given iron
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:003114
CRM-M-65527-2024 (O&M)
ghope blow on my right leg due to which my leg got fracture and Gopal
Singh given blow stick on my right arm. In the meantime Dadde Singh told
that his legs are yet to be fracture than Dade given blow iron axe on my
right knee and Mukhi Singh given blow sticks on my back while I was fell
on the ground. I raise alarm and people gathered there after seen
gathering all accused ran away from the spot along with their respected
weapons by taking to my bike bearing No. PB-03-AY-3723, Mobile
Samsung, Purse Containing Rs. 8000/-. My father Gurbachan Singh
reached on the spot when he came to know. Due to Injuries he arrange
vehicle and got admitted me at Civil Hospital at Rampura. I was referred
to Civil Hospital, Bathinda. I am under treatment cause of enmity is that
someday ago I lost my purse containing Rs. 6000/- some was recovered
from Gopal Singh due to this grudge they inflicted injuries to me with
common intention they took my bike, Samsung mobile and my purse.
Action be taken against them. Statement, recorded, heard and found
correct. Sd/-Gurdit Singh."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner
is in custody since 16.07.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in
question. It has been iterated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner has been attributed only simple injury & co-accused-Harjinder
Singh @ Ghuka Singh, who has been attributed the grievous injury, has
been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated
13.07.2021 passed in CRM-M-5787-2021. Hence, regular bail is prayed
for.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition arguing
that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does
not deserve the concession of the regular bail.
5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the
available records of the case.
6. The petitioner was arrested on 16.07.2024 whereinafter
investigation was carried out qua the petitioner & challan was presented on
11.09.2024. Total 11 prosecution witnesses have been cited out of which 8
stand examined. It is not in dispute that all the private prosecution witnesses
have been examined. The rival contention of the learned counsel for the
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:003114
CRM-M-65527-2024 (O&M)
parties; as to whether the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR
in question as also the exact role of the petitioner into the alleged incident
and the evidence available against him; shall be gone into during the course
of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these
rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing
tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner
absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the remaining
prosecution evidence. As per the custody certificate dated 12.01.2025 filed
by the learned State counsel, the petitioner has suffered incarceration for
more than 05 months and 26 days. As per the said custody certificate, the
petitioner is said to be involved in other FIR(s) also. Indubitably, the
antecedents of a person are required to be accounted for while considering a
regular bail petition preferred by him. However, this factum cannot be a
ground sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the
petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular
bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances
of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of
U.P. and another, 2012(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 586; a Division Bench
judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das vs.
State, 1998(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 477 & judgments of this Court in CRM-
M-38822-2021 titled as Akhilesh Singh vs. State of Haryana, decided on
29.11.2021 and Balraj vs. State of Haryana, 1998(3) R.C.R. (Criminal)
191. Suffice to say further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not
warranted in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:003114
CRM-M-65527-2024 (O&M)
7. In view of totality of factual matrix of the present case, the
instant petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular
bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld.
concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that
may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall
remain bound by the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence,
oral or documentary, during the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date
before the trial.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while
on bail.
(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any,
with the trial Court.
(vi) The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to
the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police
Station and shall not change his cell-phone number
without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa
Magistrate.
(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay
the trial.
8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those
which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed
hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:003114
CRM-M-65527-2024 (O&M)
State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the
petitioner.
9. Ordered accordingly.
10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression
of opinion on the merits of the case.
11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous
application, if any, shall also stands disposed off.
13.01.2025 (SUMEET GOEL)
Jasmine Kaur JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes No
Whether reportable Yes No
5 of 5
