Gurjeet Singh @ Sonu vs The State of Haryana

Vijender Singh Malik, J.—Gurjeet Singh alias Sonu and Tejbir Singh, the petitioners, by way of the above mentioned two petitions, have sought regular bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 226 dated 06.06.2012 at Police Station Ambala Cantt (Annexure P-1), for an offence punishable under sections 148, 323, 324, 341, 307 and 120-B read with section 149 IPC and section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. Learned counsel for petitioners have contended that the complainant Gurvinder Singh has been shown to have been in receipt of five injuries, out of which three are incised wounds on left and right thigh. According to them, none of the injuries is received on a vital part of the body of the complainant. They have further submitted that the police during investigation found Parminder alias Badu, a person named in the FIR as innocent and has placed his name in column no. 2 of the challan. According to them, the police also found that there was involvement of only four persons in the occurrence and consequently deleted sections 148 and 149 IPC from the case. They have further submitted that Gurjeet Singh alias Sonu, the petitioner is in custody since 14.06.2012 and Tejbir Singh, the petitioner is in custody since 26.06.2012. According to them, after sections 148 and 149 IPC were deleted, it will be hard to find out which injury was caused by which of the accused. According to him, taking into account the age of the petitioners, who are young persons, they deserve the concession of bail.

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the bail petitions. He has, however, admitted that during investigation, Parminder alias Baddu was found innocent and his name was placed in column no. 2 of the challan. He has also admitted that during investigation, sections 148 and 149 IPC were deleted from the case as involvement was only found of four persons i.e. the two petitioners and two others namely Mandeep Singh and Manjinder. Every member of an unlawful assembly is responsible for the injuries caused by any member thereof with the help of section 149 IPC. When section 149 IPC is not found applicable to the case, the injuries have to be specified individually, which is not the case here. The petitioners are in custody for the last more than five months. They are young persons and keeping in view the given circumstances, I find them to be entitled to regular bail. Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond each in a sum of Rs. 30,000/- with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala.