The High Court allowed bail to the petitioner charged with murder, permitting him to furnish a personal bond and surety while the trial proceeded.
Petitioner admitted to bail on furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No.M-36707 of 2010 Date of decision: 19.4.2011.
Jagjit Singh
.....Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
Present: Mr.Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.T.S.Salana, DAG, Punjab.
S.S.SARON, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR No.202 dated 15.10.2009 registered at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur for the offence under Section 302 IPC.
The FIR has been registered on the statement of Surinder Kaur. According to her, on 15.10.2009 at about 10.00 a.m., she came to know on telephone that her father Swaran Singh had been murdered by some unknown persons in the area near the concrete bridge of the `bein' (river) by causing injuries to him. The complainant and her husband Kulwinder Singh went to the spot and saw the injuries on the head and face of her father Swaran Singh. On conducting inquiry by the complainant, it transpired that on 14.10.2009 her father Swaran Singh was brought to the bein and murdered by some unknown persons. During investigation of the case, the statements of Surinder Kaur (complainant) and Sadhu Singh, ex-Sarpanch were recorded on 24.10.2009. It is stated that on 14.10.2009, Sadhu Singh, ex-Sarpanch was coming from village Tela Maida on his motor cycle on the kacha passage toward his house situated at Pul Pukhta. At about 8.00 p.m. when he was a little away from the village, he saw in the light of the motor cycle that Swaran Singh Fauji
Crl. Misc. No.M-36707 of 2010
-2-
(deceased) was being beaten by Jagjit Singh alias Bittu (petitioner). Sadhu Singh stopped his motor cycle and found Swaran Singh Fauji and Jagjit Singh were having a quarrel over some matter. Then in the presence of Sadhu Singh, Jagjit Singh @ Bittu (petitioner) who was having an iron rod gave a rod blow on the head of Swaran Singh Fauji. Swaran Singh fell on the ground and collapsed to the ground. Jagjit Singh @ Bittu gave 3/4 more blows of iron rod on the head and face of Swaran Singh. Swaran Singh was smeared with blood and he died at the spot. Sadhu Singh said to Bittu (petitioner) that he had done a wrong act. On this, the petitioner threatened that in case Sadhu Singh disclosed the matter to any one, he would also be dealt with in a similar manner.
Sadhu Singh appeared as witness in Court as PW1 on 15.6.2010 and he did not support the prosecution case. It is stated by him that the accused Jagjit Singh (petitioner) present in Court never caused injury to Swaran Singh (deceased) in his presence. He was got declared hostile and cross examined by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. The effect of the statement of Sadhu Singh is to be considered and gone into by the trial Court after evidence in the case has been led. During the trial of the case, Surinder Kaur (complainant) has also submitted an application in which she has alleged that her father had been murdered due to illicit relations between her sister-in-law Jaswinder Kaur and Mastan Singh @ Heera, owner of Multani Palace.
Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the application of the complainant was inquired into and it was opined that Jagjit Singh (petitioner) was found as an accused in the case and he was arrested on 1.11.2009 and from him a gold `karha' worn by Swaran Singh (deceased) besides a gold ring were recovered in pursuance of his disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Crl. Misc. No.M-36707 of 2010 -3-
Thereafter charge report (challan) was filed on 29.11.2009. Charge has been framed against the petitioner on 23.3.2010. Therefore, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the State that the application of Surinder Kaur (complainant) is without any basis.
After giving my thoughtful consideration, it may be noticed that Sadhu Singh PW1 has not supported the prosecution case. The effect of disclosure statement made by Jagjit Singh is to be considered by the trial Court. The petitioner is in custody since 1.11.2009. The trial in the case is likely to take some time. The prosecution has cited 16 witnesses and only one witness has been examined till date.
In the facts and circumstances, the petitioner on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur shall be admitted to bail.
Criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of.
(S.S.Saron) Judge
April 19, 2011 kd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant regular bail to the petitioner charged with murder.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jagjit Singh
State of Punjab
S.S. Saron
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
