Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1010 (PNJ)

Ran Singh v. State Of Haryana

2002-10-03

R.C.KATHURIA

body2002
Judgment R.C.Kathuria, J. 1. This order shall dispose of the above mentioned two petitions filed by Ran Singh and Kamal Singh, petitioners-accused seeking anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No. 27 dated 6.2.2002 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 325, 452, 506 and 307 IPC, with Police Station Pataudi, District Gurgaon. 2. Present case came to be registered on the statement of Abhey Singh recorded by H.C. Devi Charan in Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi on 6.2.2002. According to his version, he was employed as a compounder with Dr. Joshi. Lagan ceremony of son of Ram Kishan was performed on 5.2.2002. Ran Singh and his companion passed in front of him in drunken condition and abused Phool Singh, father of the complainant, who was urinating at that time. Seeing them in drunken condition, Phool Singh advised them to return to the house. Soon after at 10.00 p.m., Dhani Ram, Udey Singh, Mahesh, Ran Singh, Sube Singh, Dharam Singh, Kamal Singh and Raj Pal armed with Lathis, Dandas, Sarias and Jellis came there after scaling the main gate of the house and abused Phool Singh and started beating him. Dhani Ram and Udey Singh inflicted Saria blows on his head. Mahesh gave iron rod blow on the head of Phool Singh. Thereafter Ran Singh caused Jelli blow on the left hand of the complainant. Accused Dharam Singh inflicted Saria blow on his right leg and accused. Kamal Singh gave Jelli blow on right leg below knee. Thereafter Phool Singh fell down and the accused persons continued to beat him. He was rescued by Rameshwar and Pritam. While leaving the place, the accused threatened to kill them at the next available opportunity. 3. Initially case. was registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 452, 325 and 506 I.P.C. However, during the course of investigation on 18.2.2002 opinion of the Medical Officer had been sought with regard to the injuries suffered by Phool Singh and the Medical Officer stated that possibility of injury No. 3 on the back, chest and abdomen of Phool Singh being dangerous to life could not be ruled out. Thereafter offence under Section 307 I.P.C. was added. 4. While pressing for bail for the petitioners-accused, it had been urged by the counsel representing them that three injuries were suffered by Phool Singh out of which injury Nos. 1 and 2 had been declared simple in nature. Thereafter offence under Section 307 I.P.C. was added. 4. While pressing for bail for the petitioners-accused, it had been urged by the counsel representing them that three injuries were suffered by Phool Singh out of which injury Nos. 1 and 2 had been declared simple in nature. Injury No. 3 was received by him on back, chest and right side of abdomen. With respect of this injury the Medical Officer opined that possibility of being dangerous to life could not be ruled out. As per version recorded in the FIR injury No. 3 is attributed to Kamal Singh and Sube Singh who were armed with Jellis. It was also pointed out that Dharam Singh and Raj Pal are also alleged to have inflicted Saria blows on the left arm of Phool Singh. In view of variation in the account rendered by the witnesses with regard to the injuries attributed to Kamal Singh and Sube Singh, the circumstances do indicate that concocted story had been put by the prosecution. Regarding injury attributed to Ran Singh it was stated that as per version rendered in the report lodged he had inflicted injury on the right hand of Phool Singh which had been declared simple in nature. It was submitted by him that in views of the above stated position concession of bail be extended to the petitioners-accused. 5. While opposing the submissions made, the State counsel had stated that vicarious liability of the petitioners-accused has to be taken into account in view of the manner in which the crime is alleged to have been committed by them. 6. The merits of the stand taken by the parties have to be adjudicated during the trial of the case. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and taking into account totality of circumstances on record, I accept the petitions and order that in the event of arrest of the petitioners, they shall be admitted to bail by the Arresting Officer on their furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to his satisfaction undertaking therein to abide by the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code. Petition allowed.