Gurcharan Singh Alias Gog vs State Of Punjab on 21 February, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Gurcharan Singh Alias Gog vs State Of Punjab on 21 February, 2024

Author: Manjari Nehru Kaul

Bench: Manjari Nehru Kaul

                                                           Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:024503




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH
229
                                        2024:PHHC:024503
                                        CRM-M-57268-2023
                                        Date of decision: February 21, 2024

GURCHARAN SINGH @ GOG
                                                                          ...Petitioner

                                       Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB
                                                                       ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:    Mr. A.S. Sekhon, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Amit Rana, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case

FIR No.38 dated 10.05.2022 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 302 and 120-B of

the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and (Section 3(2)(v) of SC and ST (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 added later on vide DDR No.26 dated 07.07.2022),

registered at Police Station Lakhewali, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

2. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to reproduce the

relevant portion of the FIR in question, which has been annexed as Annexure P-

1, hereinunder: –

“Stated that I am resident of above said address and doing labour
work. I have two children, elder is son Arashdeep Singh alias
Arasha and younger is daughter Amandeep Kaur. My son
Arshdeep Singh was residing with our co villager Peenu Kaur
daughter of Rachhwinder Singh for the last 02 years and whenever
we used to ask him to return home, he used to reply that he has
solemnized marriage with Peenu Kaur and will reside with her and
we also came to know that now Arashdeep Singh and Peenu Kaur

1 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 22-02-2024 08:06:17 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:024503

CRM-M-57268-2023 -2-

were residing in some city in Rajasthan and was not on visiting
terms with us. On 08.05.2022 Arshdeep Singh and Peenu Kaur
above said had come from Rajasthan to village Bhangchari. On
09.05.2022 at 12.00 noon our co villager Swaranjeet Singh son of
Karnail Singh told me that your son Arshdeep Singh has gone to
the house of our co villager Gurcharan Singh alias Goga son of
Mandar Singh, where Gurcharan Singh alias Goga son of Mandar
Singh, Harjeet Kaur wife of Mandar Singh, Mandeep Singh son of
Sukhdeep Singh alias Kala, Peenu Kaur daughter of Rachhwinder
Singh and Pindi Singh son of unknown Residents of Bhangchari
were present and they gave some poisonous substance to your son
Arshdeep Singh at the house of Gurcharan Singh alias Goga son of
Mandar Singh due to which his health deteriorated and there was
froth coming out of his mouth and Peenu Kaur has taken your son
Arshdeep Singh to her house with the help of other persons and I
was told about this by our co villagers Ravi Singh and Swaranjeet
Singh above said. Then I arranged for a vehicle and got admitted
my son Arashdeep Singh in Sandhu Hospital, Sri Muktsar Sahib
where he died during treatment. The motive behind the occurrence
is that Peenu Kaur is daughter of uncle of Mandeep Singh, due to
which he was nursing grudge against my son and they have
committed murder of my son after conspiring with each other by
administering him some poisonous substance, due to which my son
Arashdeep Singh had died. Legal action may please be taken
against above said Gurcharan Singh alias Goga, Harjeet Kaur,
Mandeep Singh, Peenu Kaur and Pindi Singh. Sd/- Sukhjinder
Singh in the presence of Sukhdev Singh son of Surjeet Singh
Resident of Bhangchari.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the FIR

in question came to be registered on the statement of the father of the deceased.

Learned counsel has further submitted that the case in hand rests on

circumstantial evidence and there is no motive forthcoming as to why the

2 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 22-02-2024 08:06:18 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:024503

CRM-M-57268-2023 -3-

petitioner would have conspired with all the other accused to commit the

murder of Arshdeep Singh. He has further submitted that the petitioner has now

been in custody since 30.05.2022 and after the challan was presented, charges

were also framed more than a year back on 23.01.2023, however, till date, none

of the 30 prosecution witnesses had been examined. Learned counsel, while

further drawing the attention of this Court to Annexure P-3, which is the report

of Sandhu Hospital, where the deceased was taken by the complainant soon

after the alleged occurrence in question, has submitted that while getting the

deceased admitted in the hospital, the complainant had given an altogether

contrary version that it was on account of overdose of drugs, his son had fallen

unconscious. It has been submitted that the initial version given by the

complainant to the doctor on 09.05.2022 was the actual cause of death of the

deceased, which also finds due corroboration from the report of the Chemical

Examiner as the presence of Morphine was detected in the Viscera, which was

sent to it. Learned counsel has also brought to the notice of this Court that

identically placed co-accused Peenu Kaur, with whom the petitioner was

allegedly in a live-in relationship and Harjeet Kaur had since been extended the

concession of bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

21.09.2023 (Annexure P-6).

4. Per contra, learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer made

by the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, has not disputed that

the case of the petitioner is at par with that of the co-accused, who had since

been extended the concession of bail. Learned State counsel has filed the

3 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 22-02-2024 08:06:18 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:024503

CRM-M-57268-2023 -4-

custody certificate of the petitioner in the Court today, which is taken on record

subject to just exceptions.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material placed on record.

6. The petitioner has been in custody for almost 1 year and 9 months

having been arrested on 30.05.2022. The investigation in the case at hand is

complete as the challan stands presented. However, there is no possibility of the

trial concluding in the near future as prosecution evidence is yet to commence;

as per the learned State counsel, next date fixed before the learned trial Court is

22.02.2024, when some prosecution witnesses are likely to be examined.

7. In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this

Court deems it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly,

the instant petition is allowed; the petitioner be admitted to bail to the

satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

8. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall

not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

February 21, 2024                                (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
Jaspreet Kaur                                          JUDGE

                    Whether speaking/reasoned        :      Yes/No
                    Whether reportable               :      Yes/No




                                                            Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:024503

                                        4 of 4
                     ::: Downloaded on - 22-02-2024 08:06:18 :::