Disposed

Sukhwant Singh Dhillon Alias Sandeep Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Oct 2024CRM-M/46298/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought anticipatory bail in an FIR including Section 307 IPC; no specific injury was attributed to either. The Court noted police inaction in investigating co-accused Tajinder Singh and granted interim bail with conditions. On the State's action taken report, the interim order granting anticipatory bail was made absolute.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sukhwant Singh Dhillon Alias Sandeep Singh Vs… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ******

¶2

202

¶3

I. CRM-M-46298-2024 Sukhwant Singh Dhillon @ Sandeep Singh .....Pe--oner Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent II. CRM-M-46299-2024 Harjot Singh .....Pe--oner Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent Date of Decision:07.10.2024

¶4

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶5

Present:Mr. Harpinder Singh Jalal, Advocate for the pe��oner(s).

¶6

Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab assisted by Ms. Meena Gupta, DSP, Sub-Division Rural & IO/SHO Sandeep Bhaa�, P.S. Nandgarh, Bathinda.

¶7

¶8

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.(ORAL)

¶9

On 18.09.2024, following order was passed by this Court in

¶10

respect of both the pe��oners:

¶11

“These pe��on(s) are filed under Sec�on 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of an�cipatory bail in FIR No. 23 dated 22.05.2024 under Sec�ons 341, 323, 148, 149 IPC and Sec�ons 25, 27 of Arms Act (Sec�on 307 IPC added later on vide DDR No. 22 dated 06.06.2024) registered at Police Sta�on Nandgarh, District Bathinda.

¶12

Learned counsel for the pe��oner(s) inter-alia submits that as per allega�ons pe��oner Sukhwant Singh Dhillon @ Sandeep Singh armed

¶13

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2024.10.07 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

CRM-M-46298-2024

¶15

CRM-M-46299-2024

¶16

with Dang and was part of the unlawful assembly but no specific injury has been aBributed to the pe��oner. As per allega�on, pe��oner- Harjot Singh was siCng in his vento car at the �me of occurrence. He has further submiBed that co-accused Vija Singh @ Vijay Singh has already been granted interim bail by this Court.

¶17

No�ce of mo�on.

¶18

Ms. Manjot Kaur, AAG, Punjab appears and accepts no�ce on behalf of the respondent-State. She submits that no specific injury has been aBributed to the pe��oner and they were part of unlawful assembly.

¶19

From the perusal of the file, it transpires that an�cipatory bail for Tajinder Singh, co-accused was earlier dismissed.

¶20

On asking, learned State counsel submits that police file is produced by ASI Gurdeep Singh(1474). On asking, ASI-Gurdeep Singh submits that raids were conducted to arrest the co-accused Tajinder Singh and others but on perusal of police file it has been found that last zimni recorded in the file is of dated 24.08.2024. He further submits that he is not Inves�ga�ng Officer but Inves�ga�ng Officer is ASI Jaswinder Singh(829), Police Sta�on Nandgarh, Bathinda. The police file shows that police is sleeping over the maBer in the case under Sec�on 307 of IPC and even aGer has not been able to record zimni or take any ac�on and to conduct any ac�on to arrest the co-accused, Tajinder.

¶21

If raids are being conducted without recording any zimni then either submission is wrong or police officers are not taking care of law and are working by adop�ng their own procedure which is not permissible. In democracy everyone is supposed to obey law and only law. On asking learned State counsel submits that some senior police officers can be connected through video conference.

¶22

Senior Superintendent of Police, Bathinda is present virtually. She submits that she has joined recently and she would take care that all the inves�ga�ons are done in accordance with law and rules promptly and without delay. She assures that all the inves�ga�ng officer would be apprised that all zimnis be recorded correctly in �me and inves�ga�on be

¶23

��

¶24

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2024.10.07 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

CRM-M-46298-2024

¶26

CRM-M-46299-2024

¶27

conducted in accordance with the law and such a lapse shall be taken care of in future.

¶28

In view of the above circumstances it is expected that SSP Bathinda personally look into the inves�ga�on of this case and send the ac�on taken report on or before the next date of hearing i.e. 06.10.2024.

¶29

In the mean�me, the pe��oners are directed to join the inves�ga�on as and when called by SHO/Inves�ga�ng Officer and in the event of their arrest, they shall be released on interim bail on their furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the sa�sfac�on of SHO/Inves�ga�ng Agency, subject to the following condi�ons as envisaged under Sec�on 482 (2) Cr.P.C.:-

¶30

(i) that the pe��oners shall make themselves available for interroga�on before the inves�ga�ng officer as and when required: (ii) that the pe��oners shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶31

(iii) that the pe��oners shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶32

Adjourned to 06.10.2024.

¶33

Status report be filed on or before the next date of hearing with an advance copy to the counsel opposite.

¶34

A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case.”

¶35

Today ac�on taken report by way of an affidavit of Shri Amneet

¶36

Kondal, IPS, Senior Superintendent of Police, Bathinda has been filed on behalf of respondent- State.

¶37

Learned State counsel, on instruc�ons from Ms. Meena Gupta, DSP, Sub-Division Rural & IO/SHO Sandeep Bhaa�, P.S. Nandgarh, Bathinda.

¶38

��

¶39

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2024.10.07 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶40

CRM-M-46298-2024

¶41

CRM-M-46299-2024

¶42

ASI Tara Singh, submits that custodial interroga�on of the pe��oners is required in order to know the whereabouts of the co-accused.

¶43

Since pe��oner(s) have already joined the inves�ga�on, merely because the whereabouts of co-accused are to be traced out cannot be a reason to decline bail to the pe��oner(s).

¶44

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, but without commen�ng anything further on the merits of the case order dated 18.09.2024 is hereby made absolute, whereby pe��oner(s) were granted interim an�cipatory bail.

¶45

However, the pe��oner(s) shall con�nue to join the inves�ga�on as and when called upon to do so by the Inves�ga�ng Agency and shall abide by the condi�ons of Sec�on 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

¶46

Disposed of.

¶47

A photocopy of this order be placed on the connected case file.

( DEEPAK GUPTA )

October 07, 2024

JUDGE

Nee�ka Tuteja

Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶53

��

¶54

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2024.10.07 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sukhwant Singh Dhillon Alias Sandeep Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sukhwant Singh Dhillon Alias Sandeep Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Sunita Rani and Ors.

Gram Panchayat Assan Kalan Vs Surender and Others

Vijay Kumar Vs Ram Parkash and Anr.

Ravi Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Harjot Singh Vs State of Punjab

Manjinder Singh Vs State of Punjab