Allowed¶31

Amritpal Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Jan 2025CRM-M/28766/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-28766-2024, High Court of Punjab and Haryana (Nidhi Gupta J., oral, 08.01.2025): second regular-bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by Amritpal Singh v. State of Punjab; FIR No.05 dt.12.1.2022, PS City Sri Muktsar Sahib, under Ss.346/363/366-A/120-B/376 IPC and S.6 POCSO Act 2012; custody 02 yrs 11 mos 21 days; 08/23 prosecution witnesses examined, material witnesses (prosecutrix, father, mother) done; DNA report 31.1.2023 negative for semen on vaginal swabs; bail allowed on surety bonds, no merits opinion; next trial date 30.1.2025.

What did the court decide?

Release on regular bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned; pending application, if any, disposed of. ¶31

Amritpal Singh Vs State of Punjab — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release on regular bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned; pending application, if any, disposed of.

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. should be granted to the petitioner Amritpal Singh during pendency of the trial in FIR No.05 dated 12.1.2022 (second petition).

¶15

Court's answer

Having heard counsel for the parties, but without commenting on merits, and keeping in view the totality of circumstances - (a) custody period of 02 years, 11 months and 21 days undergone as undertrial; (b) no other case pending against the petitioner per custody certificate; (c) material witnesses i.e. victim/prosecutrix, her father (complainant) and her mother already examined; and (d) 08 of 23 witnesses examined so far - the Court concluded the trial will take considerable time and no useful purpose would be served by further detention of the petitioner, and accordingly allowed the petition.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner-Amritpal Singh s/o Sukhdev Singh is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

¶32

Key takeaways

Reservation: nothing stated above shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular bail (S.439 Cr.P.C.) allowed to Amritpal Singh, accused in FIR No.05 dated 12.1.2022, PS City Sri Muktsar Sahib (Ss.346, 363, 366-A, 120-B, 376 IPC and S.6 POCSO Act, 2012), in a second petition. Grounds: undertrial custody of 02 years, 11 months and 21 days per Custody Certificate dated 07.1.2025; no other case pending; material witnesses (prosecutrix PW3, father/complainant PW1, mother PW2) already examined; 08 of 23 witnesses examined with trial to take considerable time. Bail ordered on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, expressly without expression of opinion on merits. Recorded facts include victim's recovery from petitioner's custody on 17.1.2022, her consistent support to the prosecution (S.164 Cr.P.C. statement and testimony), and DNA Report dated 31.1.2023 showing no human semen detected on vaginal swabs.

¶1

CRM-M-28766-2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

210

¶5

Criminal Misc. No. M-28766 of 2024 Date of decision :-08.01.2025

Amritpal Singh

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

…..Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶12

Present:Mr. Balkaran Singh Aulakh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Malkit Singh Dhillon, D AG, Punjab.

¶14

NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)

¶15

Prayer in this second petit i on filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. i s for grant of regular bail to the p etitioner during pendency of the trial i n case FIR No.05 dated 12.1.2022 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 346, 363, 366-A, 120-B and 376 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO A ct, 2012, registered at Polic e Station City, Sri Muktsar Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

¶16

The present FIR has been registered on the basis of statemen t made by the father of the all e ged victim, which reads as follows : -

¶17

“….Sir it is requeste d that I Sukhjit Singh son of Balvir Singh resident o f Gandhi Nagar Gali No.04 SMS I have two chi l dren elder daughter Gxxxx whose age is about 17 years 6 months. Today at about 2.30 PM she le f t home. She had taken about

¶18

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.01.08 16.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CRM-M-28766-2024 2

¶20

Rs.20000/and a mobile in which sim no.9592512917 and 9 855318161 is activated. We traced her in our rel a tions but she did not trace. Kindly help us in tra c ing our daughter. We shall be very thankful to yo u .”

¶21

Learned counsel for the p e titioner, inter alia , submits that the v ictim in the present case is 17-½ years old; whereas the petitione r is 20 years old. It is subm i tted that in actual fact, the petitione r and the victim were in love affair and in a consensual physical r elationship. Learned counsel s u bmits that the petitioner is in custody fo r the last almost three years an d accordingly prays for grant of regula r bail to him.

¶22

Notice of motion.

¶23

On asking of the Court, Mr. Malkit Singh Dhillon, DAG, Punjab a c cepts notice on behalf of resp o ndent-State and opposes the prayer m a de on behalf of petitioner and s ubmits that the victim in the present c a se is a minor girl being 17-½ y ears of age. It is submitted that she had gone missing on 11.1.2 0 22 and was recovered on 17.1.202 2 from the custody of the petitio n er, whereafter the petitioner was arre s ted. It is pointed out that the v ictim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as also in her testi m ony as PW3 has supported the prosecution case. Even the compla i nant/father of the victim as PW1 and mother of the victim as PW2 h a ve supported the prosecution case. F urthermore, as per para 5 o f the Status Report dated 02.10.20 2 4 filed by way of affidavit of Satnam Singh, PPS, Deputy Superint e ndent of Police, Sub Divisio n Sri Muktsar Sahib, it is recorded that on 17.1.2022 upon recove r y, the victim was brought to

¶24

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.01.08 16.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

CRM-M-28766-2024 3

¶26

the Civil Hospital, Sri Muktsar Sahib for her medical examination but she did n ot give her consent for medi c al check-up. However, on 19.1.202 2 her slid and swab samples were taken for DNA test. Thereaft e r, on 20.1.2022, the petitioner w as also brought to the Civil Hospital, Sri Muktsar Sahib for his medical examination, from where his DN A samples were taken. As p er the DNA Report dated 31.1.202 3 no human semen was detect e d on vaginal swabs of the victim/pr o secutrix. Learned State cou n sel has filed the Custody Certifica t e dated 07.1.2025 in Court. T he same is taken on record. Copy the r eof is supplied to the counsel o pposite. As per the Custody Certifica t e, the petitioner has undergo n e the actual custody of 02 years, 11 months and 21 days as undertri a l. Learned State counsel, on instructions, further informs that out of t o tal 23 prosecution witnesses, 08 witne s ses have been examined and 15 witnesses are yet to be examine d ; and the next date fixed before the learned trial Court is stated to be 30.1.2025. Learned State c o unsel, however, admits that as per th e custody certificate filed, the p etitioner is not involved in any other case.

¶27

Having heard learned couns e l for the parties, but without comment i ng on merits of the case, ho w ever, keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances o f the case including: a) the custody p eriod of 02 years, 11 months a n d 21 days undergone by the petitione r as an undertrial; b) no other case is pending against the petitione r as evident from the custody c e rtificate placed on record; c) material w itnesses i.e. the victim/prosecu t rix, her father (complainant) and her m other have already been exa m ined; and d) out of total 23

¶28

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.01.08 16.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶29

CRM-M-28766-2024 4

¶30

witnesse s , 08 witnesses have been exa m ined so far, therefore, the conclusi o n of trial will take considerabl e time and no useful purpose would be served by further detention of t h e petitioner.

¶31

Thus, the present petition is allowed .

¶32

The petitioner-Amritpal Si n gh s/o Sukhdev Singh, is ordered to be released on regular bail o n his furnishing bail/surety bonds t o the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistra t e/Duty Magistrate, concerned. H owever, it is made clear that nothing s t ated above shall be construed a s an expression of opinion on the merit s of the case.

¶33

Pending application, if any, s tands disposed of.

¶34

Whether sp e aking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Re p ortable Yes / No

¶35

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.01.08 16.12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Amritpal Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amritpal Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Juhruddin and Other Vs Abdul Rajjak and Other

Kamlesh and Others Vs Dharam Singh (Deceased) through His Lrs and Others

Monika Bura Vs Vivek Rana and Others

Hari Singh & Ors. Vs Ram Phal & Ors.

Sunny Vs State of Haryana and Another

Parkasho Devi and Ors. Vs Mahender and Ors.