Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 394 (PNJ)

Bhaghat Singh v. State of Haryana

2014-02-18

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

body2014
Mr. Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.: - Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner Bhagat Singh in a cross case for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 307, 323, 325 and 427 read with Section 149, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.259, dated 18.11.2012, registered at Police Station, Chandhut, District Palwal. 2. Learned counsel contends that initially the case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 323, 325 and 427 read with Section 149, IPC, however, during investigation, Section 307, IPC, was added but later the allegations with regard to the attempt to commit murder were found to be baseless and as such, Section 307, IPC, was ordered to be deleted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hodal. She further submits that the petitioner was arrested and granted bail by the learned Area Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 25.04.2013 (Annexure P6). She further submits that under the influence of the opposite party, Section 307, IPC, has once again been invoked and now the Investigating Agency is after the petitioner to arrest him. She also contends that it is a case of version and cross-version and it has yet to be established as to which party is aggressor. She further contends that in compliance of the order dated 21.12.2013 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no more required for investigation by the Investigating Agency in the present case. 3. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Mohinder Singh, Police Station, Chandhut, District Palwal, very fairly concedes that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required in the present case. It has also been conceded that it is a case of version and cross-version. He further concedes that the injury allegedly received by a shot of firearm was declared as simple. 4. In view of the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is allowed and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 21.12.2013 are made absolute. 5. The petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the conditions laid down in Section 438(2), Cr.P.C.