Thomas And Another vs The State Of Punjab on 20 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

Thomas And Another vs The State Of Punjab on 20 February, 2024

Author: Manjari Nehru Kaul

Bench: Manjari Nehru Kaul

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:023401

                                      2024: PHHC: 023401
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                       CRM-M No.58710 of 2023
                   Date of decision: 20th February, 2024

Thomas & another
                                                                   ... Petitioners
State of Punjab
                                                                  ... Respondent


Present:     Mr. Surinder Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
             Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. Dy. Advocate General, Punjab
             for the respondent/State.
             Mr. Kushagra Mahajan, Advocate for the complainant.


1. The petitioners are seeking the concession of bail under
Section 438 Cr.P.C. in case DDR No.24 dated 06.08.2023 under
Sections 326, 336, 427, 324, 323, 160, 452, 148 and 149 IPC as well as
in FIR No.113 dated 12.07.2023 under Sections 160, 336, 427, 148,
149 and 506 IPC registered at Police Station Majitha District Amritsar.

2. On the last date of hearing, i.e. 21.11.2023, while noticing
the following submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners,
this Court had granted the concession of interim bail to the petitioners
and asked them to join investigation.

“While drawing the attention of this Court to DDR
(Annexure P-2) in question learned counsel for the
petitioner inter alia contends that a perusal of the same
reveals that the same has been registered after 26 days of
the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel submits that

1 of 2
::: Downloaded on – 22-02-2024 01:45:38 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:023401

CRM-M No.58710 of 2023 2024: PHHC: 023401

though the petitioners were named therein, however, as
far as petitioner No.1 is concerned except his presence
being shown at the place of occurrence, no other role
much less any injury has been attributed to him; qua
petitioner No.2, no doubt, he is named also but has been
attributed a simple injury with a dang on the right hand of
the father of the complainant. It has been further
submitted that injury inviting the mischief of Section 326
IPC has not been attributed to either of them but to the co-
accused William Masih.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in
compliance of the order dated 21.11.2023, the petitioners have joined
investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency.

4. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Harwant,
does not dispute the factum of the petitioners having joined
investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on
further instructions submits that the petitioners are not required for
further investigation much less for their custodial interrogation.

5. In the circumstances, the petition is allowed and the interim
order dated 21.11.2023 is made absolute subject to the conditions laid
down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Needless to say, in case the petitioners
misuses the concession of bail granted to them, the State would be at
liberty to seek cancellation of the bail granted to them.

                                           (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
February 20, 2024
            Whether speaking/reasoned                    Yes/No
            Whether reportable                           Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:023401

2 of 2
::: Downloaded on – 22-02-2024 01:45:40 :::


Add a Comment

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