Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amritpal Singh Alias Kanu vs State Of Punjab on 28 February, 2025
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:028733
CRM-M-44868-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-44868-2024
Reserved on: 03.02.2025
Pronounced on: 28.02.2025
Amritpal Singh @ Kanu ...Pe oner
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Sumeet Puri, Advocate,
for the pe oner.
Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate,
for the complainant.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Sta0on Sec0ons
27 23.02.2024 Sadar Dhuri, Dis.. Sangrur 307, 341, 323, 506, 148,
149, 201 IPC
1. The pe oner incarcerated in the FIR cap oned above had come up before this Court under Sec on 483 of Bhara ya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail.
2. In paragraph 7 of the bail pe on, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3. The facts and allega ons are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:
"2. That pursuant to the said order, it is submi ed that the brief facts of case/FIR no. 27 dated 23.02.2024 u/s 307, 341, 323, 506, 148, 149, 201 IPC (offence u/s 307 IPC was added vide DDR No.14 dated 26.02.2024 and then offence u/s 307 was deleted and offence u/s 308 IPC was added vide DDR no.36 dated 25.10.2024 later on) P.S., Sadar Dhuri, District Sangrur are that the present FIR was registered against Jashan son of Amarjeet Singh resident of Gandowal, P.S. Sherpur, Sukhpreet Singh son of Kuldeep Singh resident of Jhaloor, District Barnala and 3 un-known persons on the 1 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 01-03-2025 20:01:01 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:028733 CRM-M-44868-2024 basis of statement of Shamsher Singh son of Chhaju Singh son of U am Singh resident of Soora Pa:, Ghanauri Kalan to the effect that, he is an agriculturist. He has two children. His eldest daughter namely Ravneet Kaur is married at village Bhojowali and younger son namely Harmanpreet Singh, aged about 29 years, is also married and assists him in his agricultural work. On 22.02.2024, at about 6:15 P.M., his son Harmanpreet Singh was coming from the house of his (complainant) elder brother namely Balwinder Singh and when his son Harmanpreet Singh reached in front of their house then from Dhuri side one car, bearing registra@on number PB-44-B-6011 of white colour being driven by Jashan, came there and stopped near his son. Meanwhile Jashan, who was armed with an Iron Rod which was welded with half of bicycle chain and Sukhpreet Singh also armed with an Iron Rod along with three uniden@fied persons who were also armed with Iron Rods alighted from the vehicle. Jashan gave an Iron Rod blow towards his son which hit on the leB side of his forehead. His son in order to save himself ran away. Then uniden@fied persons stopped him. Jashan and Sukhpreet Singh gave Iron Rod blows to his son on the back side of his head due to which his son fell down. While he was lying on the ground, all the accused persons inflicted injuries on the person of his son with their Iron Rods on his leB arm and fingers of his leB hand. He (complainant) raised alarm to save his son which a racted his nephew Amandeep Singh to the spot and seeing people gathering there, aBer giving threats of dire consequences to his son, all the accused along with their respec@ve weapons ran away from the spot in their car. He got his son admi ed to Civil Hospital Dhuri from where, due to his worsened medical condi@on, his son was referred to DMC Ludhiana, where his treatment is going on. On the basis of said statement of Shamsher Singh, present FIR was registered against Jashan and Sukhpreet Singh and 3 un-known persons and inves@ga@on commenced."
4. The pe oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi ons and contends that further pre-trial incarcera on would cause an irreversible injus ce to the pe oner and his family.
5. The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report. State counsel referring the status report dated 07.01.2025 submits that due to injuries on the person of vic m Harmanpreet Singh, he was in COMA and hospitalized for 5/6 months at DMC, 2 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 01-03-2025 20:01:02 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:028733 CRM-M-44868-2024 Ludhiana and now also he is on bed and requires a care taker. Counsel for the complainant also opposes the bail and submits that more than 80 lakhs have already been spent on the treatment of the vic m and so far there is no improvement.
6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following por ons of the reply, which read as follows:
"8. A. ROLE OF THE PETITIONER AMRITPAL SINGH @ KANU The present FIR was registered against accused Jashan (Jashanpreet Singh @ Jashan verified later on) and Sukhpreet Singh and three un-known persons on the basis of statement of Shamsher Singh. During inves ga on, accused/pe oner Amritpal Singh @ Kanu and his 2 other co-accused were nominated as accused in this case. It was duly substan ated that on 22.02.2024, Harmanpreet Singh (son of complainant) reached in front of his house. Where all the 5 accused persons including present pe oner Amritpal Singh on car bearing PB-44- B-6011 armed with deadly weapons and they gave severe bea ngs to Harmanpreet Singh (son of complainant) with the common inten on to kill him and inflicted 8 injuries to him, out of which, injuries no. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 declared by the doctor as Grievous caused with blunt weapon and injuries no. 6 and 8 as simple in nature. It is further submi.ed that injured is not able to speak even now. So, a specific role is a.ributed to the pe oner in the commission of present serious offence. B. THE EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER
i) During interroga on accused Jashanpreet Singh @ Jashan disclosed that, he, Gurlal Singh @ Sunny, Ranjit Singh @ Dhindsa and Amritpal Singh @ Kanu in connivance with each other gave severe bea ng to Harmanpreet Singh with the inten on to kill him. On the basis of his said disclosure, Gurlal Singh @ Sunny, Ranjit Singh @ Dhindsa and Amritpal Singh @ Kanu were nominated as accused in this case.
ii) Accused Gurlal Singh @ Sunny, Ranjit Singh @ Dhindsa and Amritpal Singh @ Kanu (now pe oner) were iden fied by Shamsher Singh (complainant) that they are the persons, who gave severe bea ngs to his son Harmanpreet Singh with the inten on to kill him.
Iii) From the statements of witnesses under sec on 180 of the BNSS it clearly revealed that the pe oner played an ac ve role in the commission of the present offence.
C. xxx xxx xxx The pe@@oners/accused took ac@ve part in the commission of present 3 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 01-03-2025 20:01:02 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:028733 CRM-M-44868-2024 offence in connivance with his other co-accused and all of them with common inten@on gave severe bea@ngs to Harmanpreet Singh (son of complainant) with the common inten@on to kill him and inflicted 8 injuries to him, out of these injuries, injury no.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 declared by the doctor as grievous and injuries no.6 and 8 as simple in nature. So, the pe@@oner is not en@tled for the grant of regular bail."
REASONING:
7. There is sufficient primafacie evidence connec ng the pe oners with the alleged crime. Given the injuries inflicted on the person of the vic m and condi on of the vic m, who is s ll on bed, no ground is made out for grant of bail to the pe oner.
8. A perusal of the bail pe on and the documents a.ached primafacie points towards the pe oner's involvement and does not make out a case for bail. The impact of crime would not jus fy bail. Any further discussions will likely prejudice the pe oner; this court refrains from doing so.
9. Any observa on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.
10. Pe00on dismissed. All pending applica ons, if any, are disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 28.02.2025 Jyo -II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 4 4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 01-03-2025 20:01:02 :::