Allowed

Sakattar Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Dec 2013CRM-M/28242/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner Sakattar Singh, arrested for offences under IPC and Arms Act arising from a cross-case with similar co-accused., sought regular bail. The court noted the case involved a version and cross-version dispute with a completed investigation and confirmed a compromise between private factions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial subject to furnishing bail bonds.

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

¶1

Criminal Misc.No.M-28242 of 2013

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc.No.M-28242 of 2013 Date of Decision: 02^nd December, 2013

Sakattar Singh

.. Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

.. Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶11

Present: Mr.Rajinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.K.S.Pannu, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

¶14

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.

¶15

Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, Sakattar Singh, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 148, 307, 323, 324, 325 read with Section 149, IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act in a cross-case arising out of FIR No.177, dated 02.11.2012, registered at Police Station, Ajnala, District Amritsar.

¶16

Learned counsel contends that though the injury attracting the mischief of Section 307, IPC, has been attributed to the petitioner but now the better sense has prevailed and the petitioner has effected a compromise with the injured persons; and that it is a case of version and cross-version.

¶17

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Samul Masih, Police Station, Ajnala, District Amritsar, submits that it is a case of version and cross-version and the similar situate co-accused, namely,

¶18

{2}

¶19

Criminal Misc.No.M-28242 of 2013

¶20

Partap Singh, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar.

¶21

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record.

¶22

Concededly, it is a case of version and cross-version. Which party was aggressor is a moot point at this stage. The petitioner is behind the bars from 10.06.2013. The investigation is complete and the chargesheet (report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.) has already been presented before the learned court below. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner both the private factions have sorted out their disputes and effected a compromise. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Samul Masih, has also admitted the factum of compromise effected between the private parties.

¶23

Keeping in view totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner-Sakattar Singh son of Amrik Singh r/o village Dhariwal Kaler Tehsil Ajnala District Amritsar, is ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial of the present case subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/DutyMagistrate, Amritsar.

¶24

December 02, 2013 Seema

¶25

(Naresh Kumar Sanghi)

¶26

Judge

Sakattar Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakattar Singh 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

Baba Barmanand @ Baba Khichi Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep @ Sonu Vs State of Haryana

Harjinder Singh @ Harwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surjeet Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Baljit Singh @ Gogie Vs State of Punjab

Rakesh Kumara and Anr. Vs Boota Singh and Anr.