Allowed

Gagandeep Singh @ Akashdeep Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Sept 2024CRM-M/39321/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC, 1973, allowing his release upon furnishing bonds and subject to specific conditions, subject to the investigation being completed within seven days.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to furnishing bonds and specific conditions.

Gagandeep Singh @ Akashdeep Singh Vs State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-M-39321-2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-39321-2024 Reserved on: 10.09.2024 Pronounced on: 27.09.2024

¶4

Gagandeep Singh @ Akashdeep Singh

¶5

...Pe��oner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab …Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶9

Present: Ms. Riffi Birla, Advocate, for the pe��oner.

¶10

Mr. Sukhdev Singh, AAG, Punjab.

¶11

Ms. Navdeep Kaur Brar, Advocate, for the complainant.

¶12

¶13

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶14

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta0on	Sec0ons
26	16.04.2024	Khui Khera, Dis/. Fazilka	323, 324, 341, 34 IPC (Sec�on 326 IPC added later on)

¶15

The pe��oner apprehending arrest in the FIR cap�oned above has come up before this Court under Sec�on 438 CrPC, 1973, seeking an�cipatory bail.

¶16

In paragraph 13 of the bail pe��on, it is men�oned that whether the pe��oner is involved in other cases or not, those details are not available with the family of the pe��oner. However, as per the status report, the State has also silent about criminal antecedents

¶17

The facts and allega�ons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows:

¶18

“ 3. (i). Ini�ally, the FIR in ques�on was registered u/s 323, 324, 341, 34 IPC against five accused by name (1) Gagandeep Singh @ Akashdeep Singh son of Jaspal Singh (present pe��oner) (2) Jaspal Singh @ Babbal son of Milkha Singh (3) Gagandeep Singh son of Milkha Singh (4) Aman son of Ginder Ram and (5) Jashandeep son of Jaspal Singh on the statement of Gurmeet Singh son of Inderjeet Singh, on the allega�ons that the accused

¶19

in connivance with each other, caused injuries to the complainant

¶20

JYOTI 2024.09.30 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶21

¶22

CRM-M-39321-2024

¶23

Gurmeet Singh and his associates. It was stated by the complainant that on 14.04.2024 there was marriage of Bi3u @ Sandeep Kumar (son of taya of the complainant), so the complainant and his family members went to a3end the marriage. On the same day i.e. 14.04.2024, at about 10.00 PM, the complainant and his younger brother Gurwinder Singh were going to their house on Ac�va, and when they were about to enter the road towards Katehra a6er crossing GT road, then the accused persons armed with weapons, came there and caused injuries to the complainant, his brother Gurwinder Singh. When the complainant raised a hue and cry, the nephew of the complainant namely Mandeep Singh reached there. The accused also caused injuries to him.”

¶24

The pe��oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi�ons and contends that further pre-trial incarcera�on would cause an irreversible injus�ce to the pe��oner and their family.

¶25

The State’s counsel oppose bail and refer to the status report. Counsel for the complainant submits that she would have no objec�on in case, bail pe��on is allowed.

¶26

It would be appropriate to refer to the following por�ons of the reply, which read as follows:

¶27

“5. The Role of the pe��oner - The pe��oner and co-accused caused injuries to the complainant, his brother and his nephew. The injury No.1 of the injured Gurmeet Singh was declared as grievous by the Doctor. The injury No.2 of the injured Gurmeet Singh caused with kirch, is a3ributed to the pe��oner. The pe��oner ac�vely par�cipated in the commission of crime.

¶28

The Evidence against the pe��oner - During the inves�ga�on, it has been found that the pe��oner-accused in connivance with co- accused, caused injuries to the complainant and his associates.”

¶29

The Police did not arrest the pe��oner; if they intended to arrest the pe��oner, it was not impossible. A perusal of the reply does not point out the steps taken to arrest the accused.

¶30

Counsel for the complainant submits that she has no objec�on if bail is granted.

¶31

The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecu�on or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing the same for the bail stage.

¶32

JYOTI

¶33

2024.09.30 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶34

¶35

CRM-M-39321-2024

¶36

Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allega�ons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus�fiability for custodial interroga�on or the pre-trial incarcera�on at this stage.

¶37

Without commen�ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men�oned above, the pe��oner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the �me it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶38

Given above, provided the pe��oner is not required in any other case, the pe��oner shall be released on bail in the FIR cap�oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa�sfac�on of the Arres�ng Officer, and if the ma/er is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Illaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep�ng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sa�sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶39

While furnishing a personal bond, the pe��oner shall men�on the following personal iden�fica�on details:

¶40

1.	AADHAR number
2.	Passport number (If available) and when the a/es�ng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.
3.	Mobile number(If available)
4.	E-Mail id(If available)

¶41

The pe��oner is directed to join the inves�ga�on within seven days and as and when called by the Inves�gator. The pe��oner shall be in deemed custody for Sec�on 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. The pe��oner shall join the inves�ga�on as and when called by the Inves�ga�ng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the inves�ga�on at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecu�on will be open to seeking cancella�on of the bail. During the inves�ga�on, the pe��oner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

¶42

Any observa�on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶43

A cer�fied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe��oner can download this order along with case status from the JYOTI official web page of this Court and a/est it to be a true copy. If the a/es�ng officer 2024.09.30 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 3

¶44

CRM-M-39321-2024

¶45

wants to verify its authen�city, such an officer can also verify its authen�city and may download and use the downloaded copy for a/es�ng bonds.

¶46