Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ravinder Kaur vs State Of Punjab on 19 January, 2023
CRM-M-46649-2022 CRM-M-48694-2022 -l- 291 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) CRM-M-46649-2022 Date of Decision:- 19.01.2023 RAVINDER KAUR ....Petitioner Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent (2) CRM-M-48694-2022 Date of Decision:- 19.01.2023 JASBIR SINGH ....Petitioner Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM:-HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. Harmanpreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner (s). Mr. Mohinder Singh Joshi, Additional A.G. Punjab. Mr. Vipul Aggarwal, Advocate for the complainant. 3 2 2fe 2c ie AMARJOT BHATTI, J. (Oral)
The petitioners -- Ravinder Kaur and Jasbir Singh have filed the separate petitions under Section 438 CrP.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.301 dated 19.09.2022 under Sections 323, 379, 354, 427, 448, 452, 148 and 149 IPC registered at Police Station Division B, District Police Commissionerate, Amritsar. These bail applications have arisen out SANDEEP 2023.01.23 02:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SANDEEP CRM-M-46649-2022 CRM-M-48694-2022 -2- of the same FIR and therefore, are taken up together for disposal.
The facts of the case are that Raghbir Singh -- complainant aged about 18-19 years gave his statement to the police that he is student of 11"
Class. His father Inderjeet Singh is working with an Advocate in District Courts, Amritsar. About 10/12 years they had taken the house on rent in which they were residing. The house is owned by Jasmeet Kaur and her brother Ankitpal Singh who is brother-in-law of Sukhwinder Singh. On 19.09.2022 at about 11.30 am somebody knocked the door by alleging that they had come to give polio drops. His elder sister Amarjit Kaur told that there was no small child in the house and did not open the door. The outsider again called her, on this his sister peeped out the door and saw Ravinder Kaur with 2-3 other ladies present and some persons were standing behind her. She told them that her father was not present in the house. In the meantime few Nihangs entered their house from the roof. They pushed him and opened the door. On this Jasbir Singh, Sukhwinder Singh, Baljit Singh along with 10-15 Nihangs and Ravinder Kaur accompanied by 3-4 ladies entered their house and started throwing their household articles, etc. His sister tried to stop them. The unknown Nihang twisted her arm and she was thrown towards the bed. He tried to rescue his sister, on this Jasbir Singh gave daang blow which hit on his left wrist. 3-4 Nihangs caught hold of him and gave beating with their respective barchas. He received injuries below his neck, head and other parts of the body. Their entire household articles were thrown out and both of them were turned out of the house and they locked the house. The occurrence was informed to their father and police was also informed. With these allegations, the present FIR has been registered.2023.01.23 02:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
SANDEEP CRM-M-46649-2022 CRM-M-48694-2022 -3- Learned counsel for both the petitioners argued that they have joined the investigation. Both the petitioners are senior citizens. They are falsely implicated in this case due to civil litigation already going on with the father of the complainant. No specific role is attributed to them. No purpose would be served by sending them behind the bars. It is prayed that their anticipatory bail application may be allowed.
Learned counsel representing the State has filed the status report and stated that the petitioners had joined the investigation as per the version of ASI Sham Sunder. It is alleged that the occurrence is confirmed by the eye witnesses and their statements are recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. One pen drive showing the episode is also produced before the police. It is further alleged that the petitioners joined the investigation but did not cooperate in the investigation. The identity of unknown persons is yet to be established. Even the other accused named by the complainant are to be arrested. The Investigating Officer confirmed that the complainant and his family was residing in the house in question on rent. The petitioners got the house vacated forcibly. It is prayed that the petitioners are not entitled to concession of anticipatory bail.
I have considered the arguments advanced before me as well as the facts as referred above. Ravinder Kaur and Jasbir Singh both the petitioners are specifically named by the complainant who along with Sukhwinder Singh, Baljit Singh and 10-15 Nihangs entered the house of complainant when he was present alone in the house along with his sister. They forcibly entered the house, threw away their household articles and also gave beatings to the complainant and his sister. They were forcibly turned out of the rented house and the house was locked by the accused.2023.01.23 02:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
SANDEEP CRM-M-46649-2022 CRM-M-48694-2022 -4- As mentioned in the status report the identity of other unknown persons is yet to be established, therefore, the petitioners are required to join the investigation. In this case, they were granted ad interim bail but they did not cooperate with the investigation. Even otherwise the purpose of anticipatory bail is to protect the life and liberty of the persons who are falsely implicated. In the case in hand both the petitioners are specifically named. It is further claimed that the entire occurrence was captured in a CCTV Camera and the pen drive was handed over to the police. Therefore, considering the gravity of the offence and the manner in which the occurrence took place, in my opinion both Ravinder Kaur and Jasbir Singh are not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail and both the bail applications are, accordingly, declined.
A photocopy of this order be placed in other connected case.
19.01.2023 (AMARJOT BHATTI) snd JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No. Whether reportable: Yes/No 2023.01.23 02:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document