Happy Masih @ Harpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 February, 2024

Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Happy Masih @ Harpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 February, 2024

                                                         Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:025453




                                                               2024:PHHC:025453

202        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

                                                 CRM-M-3901-2024
                                                 Date of decision: 23.02.2024

HAPPY MASIH @ HARPREET SINGH
                                                               ...PETITIONER
                           V/S

STATE OF PUNJAB
                                                               ...RESPONDENT

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:    None for the petitioner.

            ASI Bhupinder Singh in person.

                  ****

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (ORAL)

Through instant petition, the petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail

in case FIR No.275 dated 01.09.2021 registered under Sections 302, 323, 324,

427, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code at Police Station Ajnala, District Amritsar

Rural (Annexure P-8).

2. On 24.01.2024, following order was passed :-

“The present petition has been filed under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as
Cr.P.C) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR
No.275 dated 01.09.2021 registered under Sections 302, 323, 324,
427, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Ajnala, District Amritsar
Rural.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia,
contends that the similarly situated co-accused namely Swaran
Masih @ Swaran Singh and Sona Masih @ Sonu Singh have been
granted concession of interim anticipatory bail vide orders dated
20.04.2022 and 11.04.2022 passed by the Coordinate Bench in
CRM-M No. 10115 of 2022 and CRM-M No.19530 of 2022
respectively. It is further contended that both the afore-mentioned
co- accused were alleged to have given injuries to the witnesses
only. The petitioner is also alleged to have given injury to one
Lakha on his right leg.


                                     1 of 3
                 ::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2024 20:30:47 :::
                                                              Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:025453




CRM-M-3901-2024                                  2                    2024:PHHC:025453

                                   Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Subhash Godara,
Addi. A.G., Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on
behalf of the respondent- State and opposes the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

In the meantime, keeping in view the law enunciated
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI
(2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of
Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh
Singh Sibbia etc.
Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh
Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal
Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, at the first
instance, the petitioner is directed to appear before the
Investigating Officer on or before 31.01.2024 and on his doing so
or in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim
bail on furnishing of bail/surety bond to the satisfaction of the
Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with
the Investigating Officer and abide by the conditions as provided
under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

If the Investigating/Arresting Officer does not permit
the petitioner to join the investigation, the petitioner would appear
before the Illaga Magistrate, who would then summon the
Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in
investigation, in terms of the order of this Court.

Adjourned to 23.02.2024.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as
expression of opinion of this Court on merits of the case and the
trial Court shall proceed without being prejudiced by observations
of this Court.”

4. In view of the resolution passed by Bar Association of Punjab and

Haryana High Court, there is no representation on behalf of the parties but ASI

Bhupinder Singh, who is present in the Court, submits that in compliance of

order dated 24.01.2024 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the

investigation and is not required for further custodial interrogation.

5. Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel the

order dated 24.01.2024, is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the

2 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2024 20:30:48 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:025453

CRM-M-3901-2024 3 2024:PHHC:025453

terms and conditions enumerated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

6. The petition is accordingly allowed.

7. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of

opinion of this Court on merits of the case and trial Court shall proceed without

being prejudiced by observations of this Court.





                                                       (HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
February 23, 2024                                            JUDGE
manisha

             (i)     Whether speaking/reasoned                    Yes/No

             (ii)    Whether reportable                           Yes/No




                                                           Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:025453

                                          3 of 3
                    ::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2024 20:30:48 :::
 

[ad_2]

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *