Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 404 (PNJ)

Kehar Singh v. State Of Punjab

2007-03-12

S.S.SARON

body2007
Judgment S. S. Saron, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The earlier application seeking pre-arrest bail of the petitioner was declined on 7.12.2006. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the earlier application was dismissed on merit, however, the petitioner was under medical treatment from 1.11.2006 to 7.11.2006 at Primary Health centre, Mehatpur, Jalandhar. The occurrence in the present case is stated to have taken place on 2.11.2006. Therefore, it is a case of false implication. 4. In fact even in the FIR the name of the petitioner, it is recorded, came to be later on known. Besides, Dr. Anil Malik, who issued medical certificate to the petitioner, has been granted pre-arrest bail by this Court on 9.2.2007. 5. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel, I find no merit in the same. In terms of order dated 7.12.2006, pre-arrest bail was declined to the petitioner on merit. The additional grounds now taken are not such which would entitle the petitioner for the grant of pre-arrest bail to him. The fact that Dr. Anil malik, who is stated to have issued the medical certificate to the petitioner, has been granted pre-arrest bail would not entitle the concession of bail to the petitioner, as he had joined the investigation and had given his handwriting. The issue of fake medical certificate is still a matter of debate. Besides, the allegations against the petitioner are that his uncle Amar Singh was being taken to Kapurthala for his production in Court from Ferozepur. During the journey Amar Singh complained of stomach pain and the petitioner came in a Tata Sumo vehicle and almost overran the police party. 6. The learned Sessions Judge in his order dated 1.12.2006 (Annexure-P.1)has observed that if members of the police party had not been alert they could have been run over by the Tata Sumo being driven by the petitioner. Moreover, he is stated to have used the baseball for causing injuries. It is also observed in the FIR that the petitioner had a scuffle with Sewa Singh, constable. 7. In the circumstances, no ground for grant of pre-arrest bail is made out. Dismissed.