Allowed

Jagdip Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC30 May 2013CRM-M/11597/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An oral order granting absolute anticipatory bail to juvenile petitioners in an IPC suicide case. The Court held that at their age of 15-16½ years, joined the investigation, not requiring custodial interrogation. The order relied on the vernacular suicide note content to determine innocence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted absolute anticipatory bail from the order dated 23.04.2013 and no custodial interrogation required.

Jagdip Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No.M-11597 of 2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No.M-11597 of 2013 (O & M) Date of decision: May 30, 2013.

¶5

Jagdip Singh and others

....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

¶11

Present: Mr. H.S.Gill, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, DAG, Punjab. Mr. P.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate, for respondent no.2.

¶13

¶14

PARAMJEET SINGH, J.(Oral)

¶15

Instant petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case arising from FIR No.76 dated 21.02.2013, registered at Police Station Sadar, Jalandhar, District Jalandhar, under Sections 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners contends that in pursuance to the order dated 23.04.2013 passed by the Court, the petitioners have joined the investigation.

¶17

Crl. Misc. No.M-11597 of 2013

¶18

¶19

Learned State counsel after seeking instruction from Sub Inspector Jiwan Singh contends that the petitioners are not required for custodial interrogation.

¶20

Learned counsel for the complainant contends that at the stage of granting anticipatory bail, the issue of juvenility of the petitioners cannot be taken into consideration. The seriousness of allegations is to be taken into consideration. In this case, father has lost his young son. The learned counsel further contends that the petitioners have confessed their guilt before Sh. Tara Singh, Principal that they had been using the word 'Khusra' for the deceased with a purpose to tease him, though this fact has not been mentioned in the suicide note.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

Firstly, the petitioners are juvenile in the age group of 1516½ years, they are the students of 10+1 standard and have already joined the investigation. In the alleged suicide note, although the names of petitioners have been mentioned at the end, but it has not been mentioned, who was saying those words to him. The wording of the vernacular and its translation clearly says that "MENU SCHOOL VICH MUNDE GALAT BOLDE SON IS LAI MAR GAIN HAN" (some of the boys were saying wrong words to deceased, so I have died).

¶23

Keeping in view the fact that the petitioners are juveniles, have joined the investigation and they are not required for custodial

¶24

Crl. Misc. No.M-11597 of 2013

¶25

¶26

interrogation, the order dated 23.04.2013 is made absolute.

¶27

Disposed of.

¶28

(Paramjeet Singh) Judge

¶29

May 30, 2013 parveen kumar

Jagdip Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdip Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yashpal Aggarwal and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Yashpal Aggarwal and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Jasbir Singh @ Jass Vs State of Punjab

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Kuldip Singh Alias Bittu Vs State of Punjab

Daljit Singh Gujral Vs Jagjit Singh Arora and Others