High Courts(1994) 08 P&H CK 0041

Pardhan Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 8 August 1994 · Citation: (1994) 3 RCR(Criminal) 357

HON’BLE JUDGES
H.S.Bedi, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 11134-M of 1994

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 727 words

H.S. Bedi, J.(Oral)

1.

Summons with regard to Harminder Singh have been received back with the report that he has refused to accept service on the ground that his mother was not well and that he would not be able to appear in Court on account of this fact. It is, therefore, apparent that the respondent has been served.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.

3.

Respondent No.2 Harminder Singh Banga is an accused in F.I.R. No.69 dated March 10, 1994 for offences under Sections 302/336/505/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station, Division No. 6, Ludhiana. In the incident in question he is said to have shot dead one Gurpreet Singh with a .12 bore gun. He moved an application for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, who vide his order dated May 15, 1994, Annexure P1, dismissed the same holding that the accused was not entitled to bail as he had caused the bullet injuries to the deceased. The accused, thereafter moved another bail application praying that his mother was seriously ill and he was required to be available to attend to her. In support of the application he appended AnnexuresP2 dated July 14, 1994, a certificate issued by ''Kapoor Memorial Hospital'' in which it was stated that Mrs.Harbans Kaur mother of the accused was admitted in the hospital and was suffering from High Blood Pressure and also diabetes with Ischomeic heart disease and that she was in a serious condition. After hearing the counsel for the parties and despite the objections having been raised by the prosecution, the petitioner was allowed interim bail on the very next day i.e. July 15, 1994 with a direction to surrender in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana on August 1, 1994. Aggrieved by this order, the complainant has come to this Court in the present proceedings.

4.

On July 22, 1994, notices were issued to the respondents for August 3, 1994 and though the Advocate General, Punjab was served, the accused could not be served. On August 3, 1994 dasti notices were ordered to be served to respondent No.2 and direction to that effect was also issued to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana. As already mentioned above, notices have been served in the manner indicated.

5.

At the time of arguments, Mr.R.S. Cheema, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has brought to my notice that vide order dated July 30, 1994, the interim bail granted to the accused has now been extended to August 11, 1994 as he was required to look after his mother, who is at present at Medical College, Rohtak. Mr. Cheema, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that at the time of recording of orders Annexures P1 and P3, the Additional Sessions Judge, had noticed that the certificate relied upon by the accused was from a private hospital but the certificate has nevertheless been relied upon. He has urged that from the very sequence of events, which have been narrated above, it appears that the attempt of the accused was to remain on bail by one pretext or another despite the fact that his father was admittedly available to look after his mother.

6.

After hearing the counsel for the parties who are present before me, I find merit in this petition. The Additional Sessions Judge, while recording order Annexure P1 has specifically noted that the allegations against the accused were of serious nature prima facie prove his involvement in the incident as the main accused, and as such he was not entitled to bail. I am of the view that under these circumstances, if bail was to be granted to the accused on the ground of sickness of his mother, a certificate from a Government Hospital should have been insisted upon. Moreover, it is to be noted that the father of the accused who is well is in a position to look after his wife.

7.

For the reasons recorded above, this petition is allowed and a direction is issued to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana, to ensure that respondent No.2 Harminder Singh is taken into custody forthwith. A copy of the order to be given dasti to counsel for the petitioner.