Hari Chand vs State of Punjab

M.L. Singhal, J.

This is criminal misc. No. 19581M of 1998 whereby Hari Chandpetitioner has prayed for cancellation of bail allowed to Parmjit Singh alias Pammarespondent No. 2 by learned Sessions Judge, Patiala vide order dated 9.6.1998 in bail application No. 127 dated 2.6.1998 in case FIR No. 26 dated 6.4.1998 registered under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station, Lalru.

Prosecution case briefly stated goes as follows:

PetitionerHari Chand''s wife Smt. Bhuro and his sisterinlaw Babli (his brother Dalbir Singh''s wife) were washing clothes in their other house while Hari Chand was present at his house. Jasbir Singh alias Jassi son of Ajmer Singh stood in front of house of Hari Chand where his buffalo was lying tethered as usual. Jasbir Singh alias Jassi started abusing. On hearing the abuse, Hari Chand stood in the balcony of his house towards the side of the street. Jasbir Singh alias Jassi was saying that despite having been told several times, these rogues (Hari Chand etc.) do not stop tethering their buffalo. Jasbir Singh alias Jassi untethered their buffalo. Thereupon Smt. Bhuro came in the street and stopped Jasbir Singh alias Jassi from doing all that. Jasbir Singh alias Jassi slapped Smt. Bhuro saying the he would finish the matter once for all. Jasbir Singh alias Jassi started abusing and while abusing called his brother Bahadur Singh alias Kaka asking him to come and teach them lesson and Jasbir Singh alias Jassi came towards the house of Hari Chand and entered it. Smt. Bhuro was coming towards Hari Chand. Jasbir Singh alias Jassi holding a Daang and Bahadur Singh alias Kaka holding a cricket bat, came running behind Smt. Bhuro. In the meantime, Paramjit Singh alias Pammarespondent No. 2 holding lathi came from his house on hearing the calls of Jasbir Singh and surrounded Smt. Bhuro who was just climbing the stairs towards the side of Hari Chand. She became frightened. She tried to come down stairs, when Bahadur Singh alias Kaka, who was coming behind Jasbir Singh exhorted that "Jassi what are you looking for now, do the needful.". Jasbir Singh alias Jassi with full force using both hands gave lathi blow on the front side of the head of Smt. Bhuro. Smt. Bhuro fell down with face downwards. Hari Chand came down from the balcony of his house raising Raula "Mar Ditti Mar Ditti". Thereupon, Paramjit Singh alias Pamma came towards Hari Chand holding a Daang saying that if he came down, they would also make him sleep with her (Smt. Bhuro). Out of fear, Hari Chand again climbed up to the balcony of his house. All the three accused started pelting pieces of bricks and stones on him (Hari Chand) and his brother''s wife Babli. Smt. Bhuro was taken to Civil Hospital, Lalru, where she was declared dead.

Learned counsel for Hari Chandpetitioner (first informant) has submitted that Paramjit Singh alias Pamma son of Teja Singh should not have been allowed bail as the attribution to him is that he was holding lathi in his (sic) and he restrained him (Hari Chand) if he came down they would make him sleep with her (Bhuro wife of Hari Chand) and attacked him with Daang. It has been submitted that not only Paramjit Singh alias Pamma participated in the killing Smt. Bhuro, he attacked him (Hari Chand) with daang which he was holding at that time. It has been submitted that learned Sessions Judge was in error when he observed that Paramjit Singh alias Pamma did not play any major role. It has been submitted that he was also in error when he observed that the case of Paramjit Singh alias Pamma is distinguishable from that of his coaccused Jasbir Singh and Bahadur Singh.

To Paramjit Singh alias Pamma, attribution is that when Smt. Bhuro was climbing the stairs towards Hari Chand, he surrounded her and on getting frightened she tried to come back when Bahadur Singh alias Kaka, who was coming behind Jasbir Singh said that "Jassi what are you looking for now, do the needful". Jasbir Singh alias Jassi, with full force using both hands, gave a lathi blow on the front side of the head of Smt. Bhuro. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that attribution to Paramjit Singh alias Pamma is also grave and therefore, he should not have been allowed bail by the learned Sessions Judge.

In support of his submission, he drew my attention to Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiaq Hasan Khan, AIR 1987 SC 1613. Learned counsel submitted that where the Sessions Judge has improperly granted bail, it can be cancelled by the High Court. He submitted that grant of bail is in the discretion of the Court and if this discretion has been improperly exercised, this discretion can be interfered with by the superior Court.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 on the other hand submitted that where the Sessions Judge has not even properly exercised discretion in the grant of bail, this Court should not interfere particularly where there is no abuse of the concession of bail. In this case, he submitted that there was proper exercise of discretion in allowing bail by the learned Sessions Judge and further there has been no misuse of concession of bail by respondent No. 2. He submitted that very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing cancellation of bail already granted. Bail once granted should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering whether any supervening circumstances have rendered it no longer conducive to a fair trial to allow the accused to retain his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during the trial. Grant or refusal of bail is in the discretion of the Court. It is true that grant of bail is governed by different considerations and cancellation of bail is governed by different considerations and very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for seeking the cancellation of bail already granted. In this case bail was allowed to respondent No. 2 on 9.6.1998. While granting bail to respondent No. 2, I do not think the learned Sessions Judge has quite properly exercised the discretion vesting in him. He ought to have taken into account that respondent No. 2 surrounded Smt. Bhuro and restrained her form going upstairs and facilitated the causing of lathi blow on her head by accused Jasbir Singh alias Jassi. His case is not distinguishable from that of Bahadur Singh. However, I do not think that the bail allowed to respondent No. 2 by the learned Sessions Judge be withdrawn as discretion exercised by him cannot be said to have been perverse and wholly unreasonable. So, this criminal misc. fails and is dismissed.