Petitioners sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving armed attack causing serious injuries. The High Court dismissed the petition as devoid of merit without expressing an opinion on merits, noting serious allegations against armed petitioners.
Petition for anticipatory bail dismissed as devoid of merit.
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.
-1-
Crl.M.No.M-3557 of 2012(O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-3557 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: July 3, 2012
Jagjit Singh @ Jeeti and another
.....Petitioners
v.
State of Punjab
......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.JBS Gill, Advocate for the petitioners.
.......
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.108, dated 29.11.2011, under Sections 148, 307, 326, 324, 506, 341, 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Chhabbewal, District Hoshiarpur.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioners for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Brief allegations are that petitioners alongwith co-accused while armed with deadly weapons attacked complainant and Manjinder Singh and caused injuries to them. Complainant sustained five injuries whereas Manjinder Singh sustained three injuries. As the injuries were serious, hence, they were referred to PGI, Chandigarh, where they remained admitted.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that
Crl.M.No.M-3557 of 2012(O&M)
-2-
no injury has been attributed to petitioner no.2 and that only allegation against him is that he exhorted co-accused while armed with khanda to kill the complainant. It is also submitted that though injury has been attributed to petitioner no.1 and, however, the allegations are general in nature.
However, there are serious allegations against petitionersaccused. Both of them were armed with one khanda each. They alongwith co-accused while armed with deadly weapons attacked the complainant and Manjinder Singh and caused serious injuries to them. Hence, in view of these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners-accused.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioners-Jagjit Singh @ Jeeti and Sunny Kumar @ Rakado for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
3.7.2012
meenu
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioners charged with assault and attempted murder involving serious injuries.
Whether the gravity of allegations against armed petitioners precludes the grant of extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jagjit Singh @ Jeeti and another
State of Punjab
Ram Chand Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
