Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 175 (PNJ)

Gurnihal Singh Pirzada v. State of Punjab

2004-02-16

MEHTAB S.GILL

body2004
JUDGMENT Mehtab S. Gill, J. - Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated, that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He has further stated that the F.I.R. registered against the petitioner does not make out any offence againt him. 2. Before going into the merits of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner placed on record certain documents, pertaining to the condition of the health of the petitioner. He has placed on record a copy of the order dated 9.23.2004 of the learned Special Judge, Ropar. It has been stated in the order that as per the application filed by the prosecution for further remand of the accused/petitioner, copy of the report of S.M.O., Central Jail, Patiala was placed before the Duty Magistrate. The S.M.O., Central Jail, Patiala has stated that the petitioner was suffering from acute attack of PIVD and further, he was unfit to travel. 3. Mr. C.M. Munjal, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab has stated, that he does not want to contest the medical certificates being put on record by the counsel for the petitioner. He has further stated that keeping in mind the condition of health of the petitioner who needs medical care, the State has no objection, if the petitioner is granted bail, provided he cooperates with the Investigating Agency for further investigation. 4. The petitioner was arrested on 22.1.2004. Due to his physical condition, he was admitted to the General Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh on 25.1.2004. On 26.1.2004, he was produced before the Duty Magistrate Shri Ranjan Khuller, J.M.I.C., Kharar, on a stretcher. A doctor from the General Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh was also present. On 26.1.2004, the petitioner was admitted to Rajindra Hospital, Patiala. On 1.2.2004, he was sent to Central Jail, Patiala after being discharged from Rajindra Hospital, Patiala. 5. As per the documents placed on record and the OPD Slip of the Central Jail Hospital, the petitioner is being prescribed different medicines for different ailments he is suffering from, namely Hypertension, Angina, Low Backache. 6. The State has not contested the petition on merits. The learned counsel for the State has stated, that the order of granting bail should be conditional to this effect, that the petitioner be directed to cooperate with the Investigating Agency. State is not opposing the bail of the petitioner, as he is not keeping good health. 6. The State has not contested the petition on merits. The learned counsel for the State has stated, that the order of granting bail should be conditional to this effect, that the petitioner be directed to cooperate with the Investigating Agency. State is not opposing the bail of the petitioner, as he is not keeping good health. Bail is granted to the petitioner to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the condition, that the petitioner shall make himself available before the Investigating Officer, as and when called. He is further directed not to tamper with the prosecution evidence, nor would he try to influence the prosecution witnesses. With the above observations, petition is disposed of. Petition allowed.