Vikas @ Bobby vs State Of Punjab

Vivek Puri, J

CRM-7496-2021

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The reports of doctor and CT Scan dated 23.05.2019 and DDR dated 28.05.2019 as Annexure P-4 to P-6 are taken on record.

CRM-M-6224-2021

Custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by the State counsel in Court today through email and the same is taken on record.

Vikas @Bobby-petitioner is seeking regular bail in the case bearing FIR No. 191 dated 29.05.2019 under Sections 324, 34 IPC, 1860 (Section 307 IPC, 1860 added later on), registered at Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar.

Briefly, the FIR has been registered on the basis of the complainant alleging that on 22.05.2019 at about 11:00 pm, the petitioner had called him from his house. Thereafter, the petitioner along with the co-accused had inflicted injuries on the person of the complainant. The petitioner had inflicted two kirch blows on the head and one kirch blow on the left hand of the complainant.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody for the last 1 year, 05 months and 15 days, no other case has been registered against him and there is a delay of 07 days in lodging the FIR, though the petitioner was declared fit to make statement on 25.05.2019. CT Scan report indicates that the brain was normal. The co-accused are on bail and the challan has been presented but the charges have not been framed.

On instructions from ASI Paramjit Singh, the learned State counsel has not disputed the aforesaid facts but has argued that the two injuries by means of kirch have been inflicted by the petitioner on the head of the injured and the same have been declared to be dangerous to life.

Be that as it may, the petitioner is in custody for the last one and a half year, the co-accused are on bail, there is a delay of 07 days in lodging the FIR, no witness has yet to be examined and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime. No fruitful purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner in further custody. As such, sufficient grounds are made out to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

The petition is allowed accordingly.