Santokh Singh and others Vs State of Punjab and another

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh 21 Nov 2006 Criminal Miscellaneous No. 43040-M of 2006 (2007) 1 RCR(Criminal) 346
Bench: Single Bench
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 43040-M of 2006

Hon'ble Bench

Satish Kumar Mittal, J

Advocates

M.S. Balianwali, Mr. Vikram Batra, for the Appellant; Shri N.S. Gill, A.A.G., for the Respondent

Acts Referred

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304, 506

Judgement Text

Translate:

Satish Kumar Mittal, J.@mdashThe petitioners apprehending their arrest in a non- bailable offence in case FIR No. 195 dated 21.5.2006 under

Sections 324/323/506/148/149/427 and 304 IPC, registered at Police Station Dera Bassi, have filed this petition u/s 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory

bail.

2. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of the FIR.

3. Counsel for the petitioners contends that the alleged occurrence took place on 21.5.2006. The aforesaid FIR was registered on the statement of

one Sardara Singh, injured against Gurcharan Singh, Pawan Kumar, Ram, Shinder, Dharampal, Sham Lal, Sanju and Saroj Bala. In the said

occurrence, four persons were injured, three from the complainant side and one from accused side. Counsel further contends that after more than

20 days of the alleged occurrence, Gurcharan Singh died due to heart attack on 15.6.2006. Subsequently, an offence u/s 304 IPC was added on

29.6.2006 on the ground that Gurcharan Singh died because of the injures of brickbat which he had received on his heart. Counsel for the

petitioners while referring to the opinion given by the Doctor contends that the death of Gurcharan Singh took place due to heart attack.

4. In these circumstances, counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners are entitled for anticipatory bail. He further states that in terms of

the order dated 18.8.2006, the petitioners have joined the investigation.

5. The above facts and factum of joining the investigation has not been disputed by the counsel for the respondent-State.

6. In view of the above, without expressing anything on the merits of the case, the interim bail, granted vide order dated 18.8.2006 is made

absolute subject to the same terms and conditions.

7. This bail order shall remain in operation till the investigation culminates into filing of challan u/s 173 Cr.P.C. except for material change in the

circumstances. Thereafter the petitioners shall be entitled to the grant of regular bail by the trial Court and the same shall further continue till

conclusion of the trial on the conditions to be imposed by the court of competent jurisdiction.

Disposed of accordingly.

From The Blog
SC: Brother Can Sell Father’s House Even Without Share
Oct
31
2025

Story

SC: Brother Can Sell Father’s House Even Without Share
Read More
SC to Decide If Women Can Face POCSO Penetrative Assault
Oct
31
2025

Story

SC to Decide If Women Can Face POCSO Penetrative Assault
Read More