Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1581 (PNJ)

Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh Baba v. State Of Punjab

2021-08-16

AVNEESH JHINGAN

body2021
JUDGMENT Avneesh Jhingan, J. - The matter is taken up for hearing through video conference due to COVID-19 situation. 2. This petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is filed for seeking regular bail in case of FIR No. 145 dated 25.6.2019 under Sections 302 r/w 34 IPC 1860 (Section 120-B added lateron) and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran. 3. It is a case of blind murder of Gurmej Singh. During investigation, Jashanpreet Singh was arrested, on statement of Ranjit Singh to the effect that there was an extra-judicial confession made by Jashanpreet Singh regarding attack by him and his companion. After arrest Jashanpreet Singh disclosed that he had taken pistol from one Arshdeep Singh. During interrogation Arshdeep Singh disclosed that he brought pistol from the house of Varinderpal Singh @ Vicky to whom he had given pistol for safe custody. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the pistol was recovered from Jashanpreet Singh, no recovery was made from the petitioner. Name of the petitioner surfaced in disclosure statement. Investigation is complete and challan stands presented. The co-accused has been granted bail by this Court. 5. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. She on instructions submits that the allegations are serious. She further argues that the petitioner was supplier of an illegal weapon. 6. The name of the petitioner surfaced in the statement of Jashanpreet Singh. No recovery was made from the petitioner. Allegation against the petitioner is that he supplied weapon to Jashanpreet Singh. Petitioner is in custody since 05.04.2021. The investigation is complete, conclusion of trial is likely to take time. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind bars. Bail is granted to the petitioner on furnishing surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned. 7. The petition is allowed. 8. It is clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.